9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 77X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Anuj Kumar Varshney and others [2015 (4) TMI 533 - ITAT JAIPUR] - Decision in the case of Anuj Kumar Varshney was challenged before the HC and still pending - Held that:- From the perusal of material available on record, it is noted that the issue involved in the assessment proceedings related to unverified purchases amounting to ₹ 59,88,350. The Co-ordinate Bench vide its order has set ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order passed by the Coordinate Bench in ITA No. 644/JP/2015 dated 07.04.2016 for A.Y. 2009-10. 2. In its application the Revenue has submitted that vide order dated 07.04.2016 in ITA No. 644/JP/2015 for the AY 2009-10 in the case of Shri Shankar Jhalani, received in the office of Pr. CIT-1, Jaipur on 04.07.2016, the Hon ble Tribunal has set aside the assessment to decide the issue of estimatio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has been prescribed for the decision of the Hon ble High Court, therefore, an assessment cannot be kept in abeyance till such order of the Hon ble High Court. Since the implied legal issue of limitation for completing assessment as provided u/s 153(2A) r.w.s 153(3)(ii) of the IT Act 1961 was also raised during hearing remained undecided by Hon ble ITAT, there is an apparent mistake in the order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses amounting to ₹ 59,88,350. The Co-ordinate Bench vide its order dated 7.4.2016 has set aside the matter to the file of the AO to decide the same afresh after the judgement of Hon ble Rajasthan High Court in the case of Anuj Kumar Varshney Others vs. ITO (Supra) is delivered. From the perusal of records, it is also noted that the provisions of Section 153(2A) of the Act were not brought ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
