9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (10) TMI 425X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ated 7th October 2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) whereby, the ITAT confirmed the order passed by CIT (Appeals) dismissing the appeal of the revenue. Mr. Mohanty states he is not pressing question no.6.1 but is pressing only question no.6.2 in the appeal. We find that no question of law arises and the question as framed in the appeal is also a question of fact and cannot be call ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent filed an appeal before CIT (Appeals), who deleted the entire addition. The CIT (Appeals) concluded that the assessee had given valid explanation with substantiating evidence in respect of cost incurred towards purchases required in the course of his business and in support of his contention, has filed relevant bank statements, challan copies etc. In the assessment order, the primary relian ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tock worth Rs. 1,00,88,102/-, etc., was even considered in the assessment order. Even the fact that respondent had paid Rs. 25,62,560/- through the Bank L.C. to one of the parties allegedly doing business of issuing bogus bills, has also not been dealt with in the assessment order. 5 The department has impugned this order of CIT (Appeals) before ITAT, which also observed that Assessing Officer ha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ersons identified as Hawala Traders. The Assessing Officer also should have investigated further or should have dealt with in his assessment order as to why he was not accepting the explanation of respondent that he had paid in excess of Rs. 25,62,560/- through the Bank L.C. to one of the parties allegedly doing business of issuing bogus bills. 6 In our view, the Tribunal has not committed any pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
