9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (5) TMI 696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... commodation entry provider. The addition was made on substantive basis in the hands of Mr. Amar Khosla and on protective basis in the Appellant's hands. The addition in Mr Khosla's hands could not be sustained since the re-opening of his assessment was set aside on technical grounds. The Court is unable to find any legal infirmity in the impugned order of the ITAT sustaining the additions in the h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the litigants and the Advocates about the filing of soft copies of the paper books. The Registry of the Court had made appropriate arrangements for scanning services at the filing counters to facilitate the making of soft copies so that the inconvenience, if any, caused to the Advocates and the litigants is minimised. In any event the change could not have entailed a delay of 521 days. The Court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] by order dated 3rd February 2009. The Appellant went in appeal to the ITAT. By order dated 26th August 2013, the ITAT dismissed the appeal holding that even if the additions could not be sustained under Section 68 of the Act, since the Assessee did not maintain books of accounts, the additions can be sustained under Section 69A as unexplained money i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essment was set aside on technical grounds. 8. In the facts and circumstances, the Court is unable to find any legal infirmity in the impugned order of the ITAT sustaining the additions in the hands of the Appellant under Section 69A of the Act. No question of law arises for determination. 9. The appeal is dismissed both on the ground of extraordinary delay of 521 days in re-filing the appeal as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
