TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on by the assessee? - Held that:- The assessee was unable to point out that the findings concurrently recorded by the Assessing Officer, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal while sustaining the addition of Rs.3,18,000 were erroneous or perverse in any manner. Only an effort was made by the counsel for re-appreciation of evidence by this court which is not within the ambit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ether the Tribunal's order is sustainable in making an estimation of addition under section 158B(b) by the multiplication of receipts being de hors the material available ? 2. Whether the Tribunal's order is sustainable in confirming the addition of Rs. 3,18,000 being contrary to the modus operandi and the nature of transactions carried on by the assessee ? 3. Whether the assessee be grant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000 (up to September 22, 1998) and regarding the ad hoc addition of Rs.3,18,000. Aggrieved by the order, annexure A-1, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as "the CIT(A)"). The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer vide order dated March 27, 2001, annexure A-2. 4. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 0 in Indira Vikas Patras, etc. had been written, the total of which was Rs. 3,18,000 and the reply furnished by the assessee was not satisfactory which led to addition of this amount in the undisclosed income. The Tribunal while rejecting the explanation of the assessee had recorded as under : "With respect to the addition of Rs. 3,18,000 also, we find that no specific explanation has been fur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
