9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 1073X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the appeal when the order passed by the assessing authority was at Delhi. The present appeal is dismissed as this Court has no territorial jurisdiction to adjudicate upon the lis over an order passed by the Assessing Officer at Alwar. - ITA No. 318 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 17-11-2015 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. RAMENDRA JAIN, JJ. For The Appellant : Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Advocate AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) against the order dated 19.12.2014 (Annexure-3) passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur Bench, Jaipur (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal ) in C.O. No. 68/JP/2012, claiming the following sub ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... discarded evidence already adduced by the assessee? (vi) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, Hon'ble ITAT was legally justified in allowing relief to the assessee and deleting addition of ₹ 10,00,000/- on the basis of cross objection filed by the assessee whereas the said issue was not a part of revenue's appeal and as such, no cross objection could have been filed by the assessee and the issue could have been legally decided only on appeal filed by the assessee before the Tribunal against this addition? (vii) Whether the findings have been recorded by ITAT on misreading and misinterpretation of facts and evidence emanating on record? (viii) Whether the ITAT committed grave error in arriving at such con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ereas the assessee filed cross-objections before the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order dated 19.12.2014 (Annexure-3) dismissed the appeal of the revenue and allowed the cross objections filed by the assessee. The Tribunal deleted the whole of the amount on account of unexplained share capital and ₹ 14,01,765/- on account of unexplained cash credit. Hence, the present appeal by the revenue. 3. We have heard learned counsel for the revenue. 4. The issue that arises for consideration is whether this Court would have territorial jurisdiction to decide the appeal when the Assessing Officer who passed the assessment order was based at Alwar and the first appeal was adjudicated by the CIT(A), Central Jaipur. The second appeal was decid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
