9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (8) TMI 429X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is for all the assessment years. There was no material indicating suppression of receipts. Hence, Tribunal has not committed any error of law in setting aside the order of CIT passed u/s 263 - Decided against Revenue - INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 192 of 2000, 163 of 2008, 413 of 2012 , 414 of 2012 - - - Dated:- 6-8-2012 - Sunil Ambwani, Aditya Nath Mittal, JJ. Petitioner Counsel :- S.C.,A.Kumar,A.N. Mahajan,B.J.Agarwal,D. Awasthi,G. Krishna,R.K. Upadhyay,S.Chopra 1. We have heard Sri R.K. Upadhyay, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri R.R. Agrawal, learned counsel appears for the respondent-assessee. 2. The revenue is aggrieved by the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 12.1.2000, which was set-aside the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ore the AO on 12.12.1994. On checking up the account books, he had found that the returns were accepted, on the accounts books prepared by him. 6. The Tribunal thereafter has observed as under:- "5.1 The other relevant point to be noted is that CIT set aside the assessment order on the basis of incorrect reasons. As pointed out by the learned counsel, there was no material found during search about suppression of receipts for a.y. 1991-92 to 1994-95 nor the learned D.R. Was able to point out any such material which might have been ignored by the AO while framing the assessment and thus the vary basis for passing the impugned order goes away. The CIT also failed to point out as to why the AO failed to work out the amount of concealed inc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... interest of the revenue are satisfied the CIT can remand the matter to the file of A.O. 8. We find that the Tribunal has considered the relevant principles of law in interfering with the order of CIT. The Tribunal found that the assessee-respondent had sufficiently explained the retraction of his statement given on 12.12.1994. It also found that the CIT could not point out as to whether the AO had failed to work out the amount of concealed income correctly. The AO had made additions on estimate basis for all the assessment years. There was no material indicating suppression of receipts. 9. We find that the Tribunal has not committed any error of law in setting aside the order of CIT passed under Section 263 of Income Tax Act for the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
