9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 667X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax appellate Tribunal (for short called `the Tribunal') in ITA No.264/Nag/2004. 3. By impugned order, the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assesee and set aside the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 4. So the question that arises for consideration in this appeal is whether the Tribunal was justified in allowing the assessee's appeal or/ and whether this appeal involves any substantial question of law within the meaning of Section 260-A ibid. 5. This appeal was admitted for final hearing on following substantial question of law:- "Whether finding of fact arrived at by the Assessment authority & the Commissioner could have been disturbed by shifting burden of proof on department?" &nb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it is general in nature and does not specify which finding of fact recorded by the Tribunal (even the word Tribunal is not mentioned in question) is bad in law. Thirdly, when this appeal arises out of the order passed by the Tribunal, then the appellant was under legal obligation to point out the error of law in the findings recorded by the Tribunal in their order but not the errors in the order of assessment committed by the Income Tax Officer or/and Commissioner of Appeals. In the question of law of framed, we find that it is confined to referring to so-called errors committed by the Assessing Officer and Commissioner of Appeal in their respective orders, but do not refer to the so-called error of the Tribunal in their order. This makes t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rise out of the case, and hence, we have to confine ourselves to whatever question already framed and then decide this appeal keeping in view the requirements of Section 260-A ibid. 9. In the light of foregoing discussion, we are of the view that this appeal does not involve any question of law much less substantial question of law and what is framed as being substantial question of law do not satisfy the rigour of substantial question of law for the reasons mentioned above and hence, we have no option but to dismiss the appeal in limine. 10. In view of this, we do not wish to burden our order by mentioning the factual matrix of the case, because, it does not appear necessary. Indeed, the objection raised by the respondent c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
