TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1428X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... LD THAT:- We are of the view that FAA has passed the impugned order without appreciating the evidence produced by the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings, which the assessee has raised in ground No.5 in all the appeals. We are of the considered view that the ld. first appellate authority ought to have appreciated the additional evidence filed by the assessee while deciding the issue in dispute, which is very much essential for adjudication of the case. The issues involved in all the grounds of appeals are interconnected and some of them are legal issues, which are required to be decided on the basis of additional evidence furnished by the assessee and as per material available on record and after hearing the Ld. counsel f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d in upholding the action of the ITO in declining the assessee s claim that the impugned transactions of purchase and sale of agriculture land were in HUF capacity and that the same were therefore, not taxable in individual capacity. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in rejecting the assessee s claim that the assessee Sh. Surjit Singh having died before the filing of return against notice u/s 148, the ITO ought to have issued fresh notice impleading all the legal heirs of the deceased, sans which, the impugned order is bad in law. 4. That the impugned assessment is liable to be held as a nullity in the eyes of law inasmuch as the same has been framed taking cognizance of an invalid return filed on 23.11.2004. 5. Tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facts of the case. 3. The facts as narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, therefore, there is no need to repeat the same for the sake of repetition. 4. After hearing both the parties and perusing the relevant material available on record, especially the order of the Revenue Authorities, we are of the view that the ld. first appellate authority has passed the impugned order without appreciating the evidence produced by the assessee during the course of appellate proceedings, which the assessee has raised in ground No.5 in all the appeals. We are of the considered view that the ld. first appellate authority ought to have appreciated the additional evidence filed by the assessee while deciding the is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
