The Assessing Officer made additions under sections 68 and 69 in respect of unsecured loans, unexplained cash deposits, share capital and other credits, besides disallowing 10 per cent. of purchases for want of complete evidence. The Tribunal held that the assessee had produced additional evidence before the Commissioner (Appeals), who dismissed the appeal without calling for a remand report, resulting in violation of rule 46A. As several explanations relating to share capital, unsecured loans, cash deposits and purchases required proper verification, the entire matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication after admitting the additional evidence and granting adequate opportunity to the assessee. (AY. 2012-13).