9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1054X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - "1. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that the Assessing Officer has not complied with the principles of natural justice either during the course of the assessment proceedings or during the course of the remand proceedings. 2. The Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in not determining the income based on the final books of account thereby confirming the manner of determination of income by the Assessing Officer. The Learned CIT(A) ought to have accepted book results shown by the appellant. 3. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in not appreciating that the correct quantity of purchase and sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has erred in law and in facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 56,05,783/- on account of dividend and interest income. 9. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 12,92,833/- on account of unexplained receipts. 10. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,52,075/- on account of profit from sunrise enterprise. 11. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 15,73,548/- on account of share trading profit. 12. The Learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) has erred in law and in facts in confirming the disallowance of deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT, ITA no.538/Mum./2012, assessment year 1992-93, order dated 1st May 2013; ii) Smt. Jyoti H. Mehta v/s ACIT, ITA no.3211/Mum./2012, assessment year 1992-93, order dated 21st March 2014; iii) Smt. Rasila S. Mehta v/s DCIT, ITA no.3352/Mum./2012, assessment year 1992-93, order dated 7th June 2013; and iv) Smt. Pratima H. Mehta, ITA no.4671/Mum./2003, assessment year 1992-93, order dated 23rd February 2005. 4. The learned Special Counsel submitted that the similar issues were involved in the aforesaid appeal also, wherein the Tribunal has set aside the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for passing of the assessment denovo after giving reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. However, he submitted that his main plank o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... matter in the case of Shri Hitesh S. Mehta, has disposed off the same in Para-4 & 5 as under:- 4. We have heard rival submissions and consider them carefully. We have also perused the copies of the order of the tribunal in case of Smt. Pratima Mehta and the assessee passed in first round. 5, After considering all the relevant material, we found that the matter should go back to the file of the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh order, It is seen that for rejecting the books of account, the AO has not given any valid reasons as no specific defect has been pointed out in. the books of account, therefore in our view the Assessing Officer should go through the books for determining the income on the basis of books accounts" The Assessing Offi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
