9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 708X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee to the tune of Rs. 1,44,89,040/-. 2. There against, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) {for short 'the CIT(A)}. The assessee filed an application under Rule 46-A seeking admission of additional evidence mainly in the form of confirmation letters from various persons. Copies of the same were forwarded to the AO under the office letter in ITA No. 165/CIT(A)/BSP/07-08/385 dated 14.03.2008, calling for his report and comments on the same. A reminder under this office letter of even no. dated 23.05.2008 was issued. In response to the above letter, the AO under his F.No. Addl.CIT/R-2/BSP/Report/08-09//504 dated 25.04.2008 had sought two weeks time for the submission of his report/com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rpose." 4. Contention of Shri Shrivastava, learned counsel appearing for the revenue that the finding is perverse as the CIT (A) and the Tribunal has completely ignored the fact that several notices were issued to the assessee and the assessee failed to respond to the said notices. Thus, the finding that it was not a case of "best judgment assessment", is contrary to the facts. 5. On the other hand, Shri Dubey, learned counsel appearing for the assessee submits that the assessee made a request on 30.11.2007 for adjournment on the ground of his personal illness which was declined and as such, no opportunity of hearing was afforded to the assessee to put forward his case. This is also evident from the observations made by the CIT (A). 6. O ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no evidence or it has not been properly appreciated and as such, there was any perversity. 8. The substantial question of law arises for consideration only if there is perversity in the finding of fact. The Supreme Court, in Vijay Kumar Talwar v. CIT [2011] 330 ITR 1/196 Taxman 136/[2010] 8 taxmann.com 264 Delhi 1, held as under: "23. A finding of fact may give rise to a substantial question of law, inter alia, in the event the findings are based on no evidence and/or while arriving at the said finding, relevant admissible evidence has not been taken into consideration or inadmissible evidence has been taken into consideration or legal principles have not been applied in appreciating the evidence, or when the evidence has been misread. (S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
