Held that the bank statements from the very beginning of the scrutiny proceedings were a necessary part of assessment records. Therefore evidence of payments made through bank was not produced before the Assessing Officer and was tantamount to fresh evidence in violation of rule 46A, is not accepted. No violation of rule 46A (AY.2016-17)
ACIT v. Ludhiana Beverages P. Ltd. (2024)114 ITR 81 (SN)(Amritsar)(Trib)
S. 254(1): Appellate Tribunal-Additional evidence Commissioner (Appeals)-Specific request of the CIT(A) to produce invoices of particular period-No violation of Rule 46A. [S. 250, R.46A]
Leave a Reply