9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (5) TMI 547X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e required to be remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication – Decided in favour of Assessee. - I.T.A. No.2989/M/2011 - - - Dated:- 7-5-2014 - Shri D. Karunakara Rao, AM And Shri Sanjay Garg,JM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri Kirit N. Mehta For the Respondent : Shri Mourya Pratap, DR ORDER Per D. Karunakara Rao, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee on 15.4.2011 is against the order of the CIT (A)-30, Mumbai dated 12.1.2011 for the assessment year 2006-2007. 2. In this appeal, assessee raised the grounds relating to invoking of the provisions of section 145(3) of the Act and consequent estimate of the profits. Further, AO also disallowed interest expenses amounting to Rs. 52.61 lakhs. During the proceedings ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ll as in support of the estimated profits. AO determined the income of the assessee from the construction activity at Rs. 95 lakhs on protective basis against the returned income of Rs. 34,401/-. Paras 9 10 of the assessment order are relevant in this regard. There are other additions also which form part of the said income of Rs. 95 lakhs. Matter travelled to the first appellate authority. 4. During the proceedings before the first appellate authority, assessee made various submissions and succeeded partly. So far as the invoking the provisions of section 145(3) and consequent best judgment assessment as well as the addition u/s 68 is concerned, assessee could not succeed. Accordingly, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tra, Ld DR mentioned that it is not possible that the substantive assessment is not done considering the clear cut finding of the AO given in para 10 of the assessment order dated 30.12.2008 for the AY 2006-2007. On this legal issue, both the parties are of the opinion that the matter may be remanded to the files of the AO for deciding the issue afresh considering the findings of the AO in the earlier assessment years on the necessity of making substantive additions. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the relevant material placed before us. On hearing both the parties, we are of the opinion that there is no clarity on facts relating to the details of the additions made in the su ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
