2014 (4) TMI 245

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... y for the sum was not carried over in the following accounting year, whereas the fact, according to the CIT(A), was that the credit entry for the sum was the first entry in the ledger of the concerned party – CIT(A) has given some particulars with which the Tribunal concurred in holding that the AO ignored those figures - the addition made by the AO was deleted by the CIT(A) and was approved by th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... er the learned Tribunal erred in law by upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by allowing the grounds in order under section 250 for the assessment year 200607 and opined that there is no reason to disbelieve the purchases ? II. Whether the learned Tribunal erred in law by upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) by taking the view that in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... oner of Income-tax (Appeals) was correct in the facts and circumstances of the case. Both the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal appear to have concurrently held that the Assessing Officer without sufficient reason arrived at the finding that there was cessation of liability to the extent of Rs. 13,28,282 because he was of the opinion that the liability for the aforesaid sum was .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X