TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 1003X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... addition cannot be made merely on presumption that assessee had earned undisclosed income and incurred expenses outside books of account, which need no interference being finding of fact, the appeal lacks merit and is hereby dismissed . - Income Tax Appeal No. - 604 of 2012, 81 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 16-10-2019 - Bharati Sapru And Rohit Ranjan Agarwal JJ. For the Appellant : Manu Ghildyal,S.S.C. I.T. For the Respondent : R.R. Agrawal, Kartikeya Saran, Suyash Agarwal ORDER (PER HON'BLE ROHIT RANJAN AGARWAL, J.) 1. These two connected appeals, under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter called as 'Act') a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITAT is legally justified in reversing the concurrent finding of fact of the authorities below without appreciating the material on record? (5) Whether the ITAT is legally justified in reversing the concurrent findings of fact of the authorities below in the absence of fresh material placed before it? 3. Income Tax Appeal No. 81 of 2003 was admitted on 15.01.2014 on substantial question of law nos. 1 and 2, which are hereasunder:- (1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. ITAT, New Delhi was justified in law in deleting the penalty imposed by the A.O. for ₹ 3,05,58,009/- u/s 158 BFA (2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ignoring that matter related to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that expenses debited by the assessee in trading and profit and loss account for various years of the block period could not be verified, thus, the books of accounts were rejected. Assessing Officer applied rate of 8% in order to ascertain the income for the block period and estimated the same at ₹ 51,44,968/-. This, however, was done by the Assessing Officer without giving credit to the income already returned by the assessee. 6. Against the assessment order an appeal was filed before CIT (Appeals), who on 13.08.2007 deleted the addition of ₹ 51,44,968/- on the ground that provisions of Section 44 AD were not applicable to the facts of the case. However, one addition in respect of il ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said order an appeal was preferred before CIT (Appeals) by the assessee, the CIT (Appeals) on 16.03.2011 confirmed the action of the AO in initiating proceedings under Section 158 BD of the Act and completed the assessment at an income of ₹ 4,85,04,776/-. Further, the CIT(Appeals) deleted the addition of ₹ 6,38,500/- which was the commission paid by the assessee. 11. Against the said order, two appeals were filed before the ITAT, one by the assessee, ITA No. 26 (Del) of 2011 and the other ITA No. 28 (Del) of 2011 by the Department. The Tribunal on 31.10.2011 allowed the appeal of the assessee while dismissed the appeal of the Revenue on the ground that where the income had already been assessed or r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
