9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peals. Mr. Suresh Kumar for Respondents in both Appeals. P.C. : 1. These Appeals involve a small issue. They are taken up for final disposal at the admission stage with the consent of the learned Counsel for the parties. Since facts are common in both the Appeals, we may notice the same from Income Tax Appeal No.1452 of 2016. 2. This Appeal is filed by the Assessee to challenge the Judg ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r made addition under Section 68 of the Act. CIT(A) granted only limited relief. The Tribunal, by the impugned Judgment, remanded the issue before the Assessing Officer making following observations : "..... It is the submission of the Ld. Counsel for the assessee that since no incriminating material was found during the course of search, therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ply their mind which are being relied on by the Ld. Counsel for the assessee before us for the first time to the proposition that the AO could not have made any addition u/s. 68 of the I.T. Act, 1961 in absence of any incriminating material found during the course of search. Under the aforementioned circumstances, we deem it proper to restore the issue to the file of the AO with a direction to dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decide the correctness of his contention, bearing in mind the facts on record. There was no purpose in remanding the issue back to the Assessing Officer. The facts necessary to decide the question were at large before the Tribunal. Whether in view of such facts, the Judgments cited by the Counsel for the Assessee were applicable or not, the Tribunal had to decide. This issue should not have been r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
