9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 328X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ' for short) all identically dated 30/03/2010 for Asst.Yearss 1998-99 to 2003-04 respectively. Since all these appeals pertain to the same assessee, these were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. The grounds are identical in quantum appeals as well as in penalty appeals. Extracted from ITA No.1763/Ahd/2010-AY 1998-99 (quantum appeal) 1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in passing the impugned appellate order without confronting the appellant with the A.O/s remand report and the findings arrived therein for rebuttal though having relied upon the same while deciding the issues in dispute. The impugned order thus requires to be held as bad in law, the same being ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and not cheque deposits. 3.2 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the A.O. himself on identical facts while making additions in respect of unaccounted bank accounts in case of other family members of the appellant has taxed only peak credit even in case of cheque deposits. Thus, in absence of any change in facts, the learned A.O. was not justified in taxing only the credits appearing in the bank accounts. The learned CIT(A) was accordingly not justified in confirming the said action of the A.O. 3.3 The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the appellant being engaged in the business of financing, both the debit and credit entries appearing in the unaccounted bank accounts requires to be considered since the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ccounts as income of the appellant is wholly illogical and bad in law. 5. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in directing the A.O. to recompute the estimated and hypothetical addition of Rs.24,65,985/- on account of alleged interest income accrued on nonoperative and operative finance for a period of 6 months @ 15%. The appellant states that the learned CIT(A) ought to have directed the A.O. to work out the interest @ 9% on the actual day-to-day cash balance and not on the closing cash balance which is wholly illogical. 6. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs.1,75,000/- on account of investment in FDR's out of income from undisclosed sources. In view of facts of the case, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AYs 1998-99 to 2002-03 vide order dated 10/06/2008 had restored the appeals back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for a fresh decision. He submitted that the Tribunal had followed the decision passed in ITA Nos.291 & 292/Ahd/2008 for AY 2003-04 dated 01/05/2008. He pointed out that although the ld.CIT(A) has reproduced the submission of the assessee in his order, he has not considered the request made for supply of the remand report. He has drawn our attention towards page No.28 of the ld.CIT(A)'s order, wherein he has reproduced the submission made by the assessee. He has also drawn our attention towards page No.408 of the paper-book, wherein the submission dated 18/03/2010 is enclosed. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the matter may ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
