2018 (8) TMI 132

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... .J. ( Oral ) In this Appeal filed under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, the Revenue calls in question the order of the Tribunal, by which the Tribunal has affirmed the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), in turn, has deleted addition of Rs. 75,16,013/-. The Assessee, it appears, filed the return on the total income of Rs. 1,81,18 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t and, therefore, the explanation of the Assessee was rejected and addition was made in a sum of Rs. 75,16,013/-. It is this addition, which has been deleted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), in fact, noted that the Assessing Officer has not brought on record a single instance of expenses not being vouched properly; any instance of any of these .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ection and Commissioning Charges" ignoring the fact that the assessee failed to specify the reason of less profit before the A.O. in the year under consideration although turnover went up substantially as compared to previous year? 2. Whether the Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi has erred in law and on the facts by deleting the disallowance of Rs. 75,16,013/- made by the A.O. out of "Project Monitoring Expe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X