9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1079X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in this appeal read as under:- "1. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in passing the order u/s. 250 of the Act. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in passing the order without complying with the principles of natural justice. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that no income from attached assets can be assessed in the hands of the appellant. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in not granting relief of liability amounting to Rs. 5,14,455/-, towards interest expenditure claimed by the appellant. 5. The learned Commissioner of Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6,245/- respectively for the A.Ys 2005-06 and 2006- 07 towards interest expenditure claimed by the assessee. It is pertinent to note that the findings given in para 3.3 above in respect of rejection/reliability of the books of accounts and the proposed adjudication of the Ld. CIT(A) in view of the said direction may have direct impact on the issue of the impugned liability, we set aside this issue also to the files of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate afresh along with the adjudication of the respective ground pertaining to the rejection/reliability of the books of accounts." In view of the fact that the present assessee is also linked to the group assessee connected with the similar set of facts and issues as that of the present assessee in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uential and the same therefore are also restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for giving consequential relief to the assessee. 7. During the course of appellate proceedings, the assessee has filed an application seeking admission of the following additional ground:- "The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have appreciated that as per the decision of Hon'ble Special Court dated 30.04.2010 in MP No. 41 of 1999, the assets under consideration and the consequential income belongs to Shri Harshad S. Mehta and hence the income assessed by the Assessing Officer ought to have been taxed in the hands of Shri Harshad S. Mehta and not in the hands of the appellant." 8. As agreed by the ld. representatives of both the sides, a similar additional ground raised ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
