9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1464X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed. The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent does not want to object the application for condonation of delay. For the reasons as above and also being satisfied with the reasons furnished, we allow the application for condonation of delay. (Application for Exemption No.8188 of 2013) Having had filed the appeal with a certified copy of the order before the Hon ble Allahabad High Court, appellant had filed an application seeking exemption of filing a certified copy of the order appealed against. Today, a certified copy of the order has been produced in Court, which is kept with the record. Accordingly, the application has lost its necessity. (Income Tax Appeal No. 17 of 2013) The Assessing Officer increased th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is a good quide to estimate the assessee s income; (iv) the assessee has furnished its statement of affairs as on 31.03.2008 as well as 31.03.2009, showing that the accretion to its capital account and assets during the previous year was explainable with reference to the income shown by it in the return of income; (v) this suggests prima facie that the A.O s allegation of the cash deposit in the bank accounts and the firm being unexplained is not sustainable; (vi) nevertheless, in order to satisfy himself, he may examine the details submitted by the assessee and cause such inquiry as he deems fit in this regard; and (vii) if he is able to reach any positive finding about cash withdrawn from the bank going elsewhere or f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... talized profit in excess of what has been offered to tax by it, he will be entitled to deny the benefit of presumptive determination of income and/or assess the excess income thus capitalized by it. 4. Therefore, a reading of the order of the Appellate Authority would make it clear that it remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer in relation to increase of total income by ₹ 33,60,000/-. Before the Tribunal, revenue contended that, having regard to the provisions contained in Section 251 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Appellate Authority had no jurisdiction to remand the matter pertaining to the increase of the total income. The Tribunal, despite considering the order of the Appellate Authority, felt that the Appellate Au ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
