9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 498X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. Delay in filing and refiling the cross-objections is condoned. 2. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 26.9.2013 (Annexure A-3) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Bench "A", Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in ITA No. 556 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ck price or opening stock price? 2. The facts, in short, necessary for adjudication of the instant appeal as narrated therein are that the assessee filed his return of income on 29.9.2008 for the assessment year 2009-10 declaring an income of Rs. 3,79,160/-. The assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 29.12.2011 (Annexure A-1) at an income of Rs. 45,03,160/-. The Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 4. Learned counsel for the revenue submitted that the Tribunal while partly accepting the appeal of the assessee had directed that in their opinion the estimated addition of Rs. 2,00,000/- was required to be made without giving any basis for the same as against the addition of Rs. 41,24,000/- made by the Assessing Officer. It was also urged that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see got out of books of account and had not declared in his returned income. On appeal by the assessee, the CIT(A) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal. On further appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer could not have estimated the sale price on the basis of rates of closing stock or some other notional basis without pointing out any defe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
