TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the entire findings of Assessing Officer as well as the Tribunal are based on facts which do not appear to give rise to any substantial question of law, in the absence of which the appeal under Section 260A of the IT Act cannot be entertained. Decided against the assessee. - INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 56 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 3-4-2023 - HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE SHEEL NAGU And HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIRENDER SINGH FOR THE PETITIONER : SHRI G.N. PUROHIT , SR. ADVOCATE WITH SHRI ESAAN TRIPATHI, ADVOCATE FOR THE RESPONDENTS : SHRI SANJAY LAL , ADVOCATE ORDER The instant appeal preferred under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act assails final order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench in IT(SS)A No.144/I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tention of learned Sr. Counsel is that while undertaking the process of assessment of Income under Section 153 (C) of the I.T. Act, can the Assessing Officer based his conclusion on presumption and surmise in the absence of cogent evidence/material? 4. The facts given rise to the present case are that search and seizure operation were conducted under Section 132 of the IT Act in the premises of the petitioner/company on 30.5.2008. The survey was conducted under Section 133A where various incriminating documents were seized. The consequential notices under Section 153A on 20.7.2010 were issued directing petitioner/assessee to file return qua assessment year 2004-2005 to 2009-2010. The petitioner assessee responded that the regular returns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nitely is not part of honest tax planning. (4) On the objection of the assessee that this assumption on the part of the Assessing Officer cannot take place of proof, was rejected by the Tribunal on the ground that the difference of value of shares sold to the Directors of Company was so glaring that one can safely presume that such transaction was not genuine especially in the absence of any material to deny the same and in the absence of any distress or compelling circumstances brought to the notice of the Tribunal. (5) The Tribunal thus held that as regards genuineness of transaction of sale of shares was required to be proved by the assessee and since this onus was not discharged by the assessee, the burden did not shift upon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
