9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 763X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... k Mathur ORDER Both the Cross Appeals have been filed by the assessee as well as by the Department under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the judgement and order dated 28.11.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow ITA No.736/Luc/2008 and ITA No.763/Luc/2008 for the assessment year 2005-06. On 21.04.2009, the Appeal No.34 of 2009 is admitted on the following su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y material and without even pointing out as to what expenditure was not verified or vouched in the books of accounts of the appellant ? Similarly, on 27.05.2009, the Appeal No.42 of 2009 is admitted on the following substantial question of law: "Where on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in restricting the dis-allowance under s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ta Singh. The remaining amounts were disallowed. However, the CIT (A) has given full relief to the assessee by allowing the entire amount pertaining to Dr. Amar Singh and Dt. Anita Singh. He has disallowed only Rs.1.0 lacs in case of Dr. Anita Singh. However, in Cross Appeals, the Tribunal has observed that the salary of last year will be allowed. In addition, during the assessment year under con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t vs. ITO 309 ITR 259 H. P.; 2.Commissioner of Customs (Import) vs. Stoneman Marble Industries and Ors., (2011) 2 SCC 758. 3.Sanjay Oil Cake vs. CIT 316 ITR 274 (Guj); 4.Shriram Jawar vs. ITO 321 ITR 400 Rajasthan; 5.Zora Singh vs. CIT 296 ITR 104 P.& H; 6.Bharat Hari Singhania vs. CWT 1994 suppl.(3) SCC 46; 7.CIT vs. Greenwood Corp. (2011) 7 SCC 69; and 8.Brij Lal vs. CIT (2011) 1 SCC 1. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
