2017 (9) TMI 823 - HC - Income Tax

Appeal is admitted on the following substantial questions of law A. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble ITAT is justified in upholding the order of CIT(A) in deleting the addition of ₹ 6,23,80,629/as bogus credit in the name of M/s. Nisha Enterprises u/s 68 of the Act? B. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble ITAT is justified in upholding the order of CIT(A) in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,36,00,000/as unexplained share application money u/s 68 of the Act? C. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Hon ble ITAT is justified in upholding the order of CIT(A) in deleting the addition of ₹ 2,98,32,595/on account of stock discrepancy found during the course of Survey u/s 133A of the Act?

Summary

Issues:
Admission of appeal based on substantial questions of law regarding deletion of additions under sections 68 and 133A of the Act.

Analysis:
The High Court of Bombay admitted the appeal based on substantial questions of law raised by the Appellant. The first issue concerned the deletion of an addition of a significant amount as a bogus credit in the name of a particular entity under section 68 of the Act. The second issue involved the deletion of an addition of unexplained share application money under section 68 of the Act. The third issue pertained to the deletion of an addition on account of stock discrepancy found during a survey under section 133A of the Act. The Court deemed these questions to be substantial and worthy of consideration, leading to the admission of the appeal for further review.

The Court directed the Registrar to ensure the original record related to the appeal is summoned from the Tribunal for inspection by the parties. While the current paperbook was deemed sufficient for admission purposes, the Registry was instructed to prepare a complete paperbook in compliance with the Rules. Additionally, the Registry was required to notify the Tribunal of the appeal's admission and provide a copy of the order for necessary actions. The Respondent waived the service, indicating consent to proceed without formal notice.

In conclusion, the High Court of Bombay admitted the appeal based on substantial questions of law regarding the deletion of additions under sections 68 and 133A of the Act. The Court's detailed instructions to the Registrar ensured proper handling of the appeal process, emphasizing the importance of adherence to procedural requirements. The decision highlighted the significance of the issues raised by the parties, setting the stage for a thorough examination of the legal aspects involved in the case.