Rule 192 — Production of additional evidence before Joint Commissioner (Appeals) and Commissioner (Appeals) under section 533(2)(x). Made under s.533, s.360, s.439 of the Income-tax Act, 2025.
Rule 192 gives effect to Section 533, Section 360 and Section 439 of the Income-tax Act, 2025. A rule cannot go beyond the section it serves: where the two seem to differ, the section governs.
Sub-rule (1) states the bar and its four exceptions. The appellant is not entitled to produce before the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) any evidence, whether oral or documentary, other than the evidence produced by him during the course of proceedings before the Assessing Officer, except where the Assessing Officer has refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted; where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence which he was called upon to produce by the Assessing Officer; where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing before the Assessing Officer any evidence relevant to any ground of appeal; or where the Assessing Officer made the order appealed against without giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant to adduce evidence relevant to any ground of appeal.
Sub-rule (2) requires reasons: no evidence is to be admitted under sub-rule (1) unless the appellate authority records in writing the reasons for its admission. Sub-rule (3) protects the other side: the appellate authority is not to take into account any evidence produced under sub-rule (1) unless the Assessing Officer has been allowed a reasonable opportunity to examine the evidence or document or to cross-examine the witness produced by the appellant, or to produce any evidence, document or witness in rebuttal.
Sub-rule (4) preserves the appellate authority's own powers. Nothing in the rule affects his power to direct the production of any document, or the examination of any witness, to enable him to dispose of the appeal or for any other substantial cause, including enhancement of the assessment or penalty under section 360(1)(a), whether on his own motion or on the request of the Assessing Officer, or the imposition of penalty under section 439.
An appeal is a review of an assessment made on a record, and a taxpayer who could freely add evidence at the appellate stage would be able to hold material back from the Assessing Officer and spring it later. The rule therefore closes the record as a default and reopens it only where the appellant was not at fault or was not heard. Sub-rules (2) and (3) make the reopening visible and even-handed: reasons in writing, and a real chance for the Assessing Officer to test what is now produced. Sub-rule (4) keeps the appellate authority's own inquisitorial power intact, so the bar cannot be used against the authority itself.
The four gateways in sub-rule (1) are about fault and opportunity, not about how useful the evidence is: material that would settle the appeal is still inadmissible unless the appellant fits one of them, and clauses (b) and (c) both require sufficient cause. Admission is a two-stage matter — the gateway under sub-rule (1), then written reasons under sub-rule (2) — and evidence admitted but never put to the Assessing Officer cannot be acted on, because sub-rule (3) requires him to have had a reasonable opportunity to examine it, cross-examine the witness, or produce rebuttal. The most misread part is sub-rule (4): the restriction binds the appellant, not the appellate authority, who may still direct production of a document or examination of a witness to dispose of the appeal or for any other substantial cause, and that includes enhancement under section 360(1)(a) and penalty under section 439.
A firm appeals against an addition and files fresh confirmations from creditors for the first time before the Commissioner (Appeals). If the Assessing Officer had called for those confirmations and the firm simply did not file them, none of the four gateways in sub-rule (1) is met and the material cannot be produced. If instead the order was passed without giving the firm sufficient opportunity to adduce evidence on that ground, clause (d) applies; the Commissioner (Appeals) must then record his reasons in writing for admitting the confirmations and give the Assessing Officer a reasonable opportunity to examine them before relying on them.
You meet it in first appeal, in the application to admit additional evidence and the order on it, and in the remand report the Assessing Officer files after being given the opportunity sub-rule (3) requires.
No evidence shall be admitted under sub-rule (1) unless the Joint Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner (Appeals) records in writing, the reasons for its admission.
where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence, which he was called upon to produce by the Assessing Officer