No order of CIT(A) was valid if it failed to comply rule 46A while admitting additional evidences

ITO Vs. M/s. Theobroma Foods Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai) Conclusion: Since CIT(A) had admitted additional evidences without complying with rule 46A which was fatal to sustaining of appellate order passed by CIT(A), therefore, the matter was restored to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. Held: Assessee was engaged in the business of manufacturing and dealing in Food Products. Assessee had taken on lease for a period of five year a new bakery at Bandra . which was extensively renovated to make it operational.  Assessee had claimed expenses which were incurred for making cabins, wall partitions, fixing ...