Supporting evidence cannot be regarded as additional evidence before CIT(A)

ACIT Vs Shri M.K. Ajat Shatru (ITAT Delhi)

It has been contended by the revenue that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in law in admitting additional evidence by way of certificate from the Divisional Commissioner without giving any opportunity to the AO. He submitted that it would be seen from the revenues record itself, i.e. from the paper book filed by the revenue in the case of Shri M.K. Ajatshatru Singh that the AO had obtained a report from the Tahsildar and is dated 28.03.2006, (Pg. 114 of DPB) wherein he had reported the value of land at Rs. 30 lacs per kana

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.