Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Panchkula Versus Shri Rakesh Kumar Khosla

2015 (9) TMI 498 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

Trading addition - assessee failed to justify the adoption of sale price at less than opening stock price with documentary evidence - ITAT restricted the addition to ₹ 2,00,000/- as against ₹ 41,24,000/- made by AO - Held that:- The Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹ 41,24,000/- on the ground that the assessee failed to justify the adoption of sale price at less than opening stock price with documentary evidence. Further, the Assessing Officer held the said addition was th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the assessee had sustained the addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- in the trading account. A perusal of para 8 of the order of the Tribunal shows that no legally justified reasons have been recorded for arriving at the said conclusion.

In view of the above, the matter requires to be remanded. The matter is remitted to the Tribunal to decide the same afresh on merits in accordance with law. - Decided in favour of revenue for statistical purposes. - ITA No. 170 of 2014 AND - Dated:- 24-8-201 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

red to as the Tribunal ) in ITA No. 556/CHD/2013 for the assessment year 2009-10, claiming the following substantial questions of law:- I. Whether the Hon'ble ITAT was right in law and in the facts of this case to set-aside the order of the CIT(A) and directing the A.O. to make an addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- in trading account deleting the addition made by the A.O. by ignoring the fact that the A.O. made an addition of ₹ 41,24,000/- on the ground that the assessee failed to justify .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is return of income on 29.9.2008 for the assessment year 2009-10 declaring an income of ₹ 3,79,160/-. The assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer vide order dated 29.12.2011 (Annexure A-1) at an income of ₹ 45,03,160/-. The Assessing Officer made an addition of ₹ 41,24,000/- on account of differences in opening stock price and sale price. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for brevity the CIT(A) ]. The CIT( .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ging the addition of ₹ 2,00,000/- sustained by the Tribunal. 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 ₹ 2,00,000/- was required to be made without giving any basis for the same as against the addition of ₹ 41,24,000/- made by the Assessing Officer. It was also urged that the Assessing Officer had r .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version