TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 932X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) quashed the above-mentioned addition. Detailed reasons have been given by the CIT(A) after considering the documents and the same have been concurred with by the ITAT. The Court is unable to be persuaded that these concurrent findings of the CIT (A) and the ITAT suffer from any perversity. Consequently, the Court declines to frame any questions on this issue. Addition u/s 37 (1) - Held that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Income Tax Act, 1961 ( Act ) is directed against the order dated 7th December, 2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( ITAT ) in ITA No. 3667/Del/2012 for the Assessment Year ( AY ) 2008-09. 2. The first question sought to be urged by the Revenue in this appeal is whether the ITAT erred in confirming the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [ CIT (A) ] which deleted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egality of the deletion by the CIT(A) of a disallowance of ₹ 4,07,202/- made by the Assessing Officer under Section 37 (1) of the Act. Here again, although the Assessee had not produced the relevant vouchers before the AO, it did so before the CIT(A). The factual findings in this regard are not shown to be perverse and, therefore, the Court declines to frame any question on this issue. 6. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
