9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 530X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... By way of this appeal, the appellantDepartment has challenged the order dated 13/03/2008 passed by the ITAT in IT (SS) A No.107/Rjt/2003 whereby the learned Tribunal has held against the Department reversing the order of CIT (A). 2. While admitting this appeal, following question is posed for our consideration: "[A] Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law and on facts deleting the add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was an admitted fact that no material had been found during the course of search that the assessee had actually realized more sale consideration than that recorded in the books of accounts. That Shri Mahendra H. Shah had not specifically mentioned the name of the assessee to prove that the assessee was engaged in recording any bogus sales. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer had made t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as available with the Assessing Officer and relatable to such search. The Tribunal recorded that it was an admitted position that during the course of search that had taken place in the case of Madhupuri Group no evidence had been found showing any undisclosed income of the assessee as defined under Section 158B(b) of the Act. That the sale consideration was received through cheques and was duly ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r than that recorded in its books of accounts. For the purpose of holding that the assessee had sold goods to fictitious parties at a price 25% higher than that shown in the bills, the Assessing Officer had mainly placed reliance upon the statement of Shri Mahendra H. Shah recorded under Section 132 (4) of the Act. However, as noted hereinabove, Shri Mahendra H. Shah had not specifically mentioned ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
