9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 930X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... its return of income declaring the total income of ₹ 6,300/. On scrutiny assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act, the same was determined by the Assessing Officer at ₹ 1,09,59,544/by making certain additions. 3. This was challenged before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which deleted the said additions by holding in favour of the assessee. 4. This was challenged by the department before the Appellate Tribunal which concurred with the findings of CIT (Appeals) and upheld the decision of the CIT (Appeals). 5. Aggrieved by this decision of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, present Appeal is preferred proposing the following questions of law: ( A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... id amount has been credited towards advance installments from the customers. For verifying genuineness of the credit , he called for the details from the assessee. Since no explanation according to the Assessing Officer came forth with regard to the credit entries of the members and the details of the members, he considered the said amount as unexplained cash credit and added the same to the total income of the assessee. 9. The CIT (Appeals) was of the opinion that the Assessing Officer did not carry out requisite inquiry and therefore, it did not approve the act of the Assessing Officer. 10. When challenged before the Tribunal by the Revenue Appellate Tribunal was of the opinion that the assessee accepted the monthly advances from th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Income Tax Rules, the Tribunal did not accept version putforth by the department that fresh evidence had been accepted by the CIT (Appeals). It, in fact, held that the powers of CIT (Appeals) are coterminus with those of Assessing Officer and there was absolutely no error on the part of the CIT (Appeals) in examining the papers produced before the Assessing Officer as necessary papers were already the part of the record. Again, it held that as no error was committed by the CIT (Appeals) as alleged and there was no question of holding that it had not followed be dictum prescribed under Rule 46A. 14. This Court after perusal of the record is of the opinion that the Tribunal committed no mistake either on the facts as on law while app ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
