9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (11) TMI 895X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n filed by the assessee for the asst. yr. 1999-2000 declaring income @ Rs. 1,22,460 was processed under s. 143(1) of the IT Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). However, subsequently, on the information received from the Director of IT (Inv.), New Delhi, to the effect that the assessee had accepted the following accommodation entries from M/s I.G. Properties (P) Ltd., M/s Parivartan Capital ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... asis the assessment was not reopened. The assessee filed an appeal against these additions. CIT(A) confirmed the additions of Rs. 31 lac which was the basis for reopening reassessment. Insofar as other additions are concerned, CIT(A) deleted the same. In these circumstances, both the assessee as well as the Revenue preferred appeals against the orders of CIT(A). As far as appeal of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s were ultimately made on that account, the additions in respect of other items which were not part of "reasons to believe" cannot be made. This issue has been decided by the High Court of judicature at Bombay in CIT vs. Jet Airways (I) Ltd. vide judgment dt. 12th April, 2010 in IT Appeal Nos. 1714 of 2009 and 1526 of 2008 [reported at (2011) 239 CTR (Bom) 183: (2011) 52 DTR (Bom) 71- Ed.]. Recen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
