9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1329X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the law as well as factual matrix of the case. In our considered opinion, this is more an appreciation of facts rather question of law. No substantial question of law. - D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 136/2018, 126/2018, 127/2018, 128/2018, 129/2018, 130/2018, 137/2018, 138/2018, 139/2018, 162/2018, 165/2018 And 168/2018 - - - Dated:- 31-7-2018 - Mr. Justice Kalpesh Satyendra Jhaveri And Mr. Justice Ashok Kumar Gaur For the Appellant(s) : Mr. Siddarth Bafna for Mr. Anil Mehta For the Respondent(s) : None JUDGMENT 1. Delay in filing the appeals is condoned. Applications u/s 5 of the limitation Act are allowed. Other defects are waived and applications for the same are also allowed. 2. In all these appeals common question ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re application money by these concerns which don t have any worth to invest at such high premium. In D.B. ITA No.127/2018:- 1. whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon ble ITAT was justified in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) which erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 2 crore/made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that neither any business activity was performed nor any business income has been shown by these concerns from whom share application money has been received, hence, it is the unaccounted money of the assessee company which have been introduced in the garb of share application money by these concerns which don t have any worth to invest at such high premium. In D.B. ITA No ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e made by the assessing officer by relying upon the definition of assessing officer as provided in section 2(7A) of the IT Act. 4. whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case the Hon ble ITAT was justified ignoring the provisions of section 251(1)(a) of the IT Act, 1961 which specifically empowers the CIT(A) in an appeal to confirm, reduce, enhance or annual the assessment; 5. whether on the facts and the circumstances of the case of the Hon ble ITAT was justified in ignoring the explanation of section 251(2) of the IT Act which states that in disposing of an appeal, the [commissioner (appeal)] may consider and decide any matter arising out of the proceeding in which the order appealed against was passed notwithstanding tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as justified in ignoring the explanation of section 251(2) of the IT Act which states that in disposing of an appeal, the [commissioner (appeal)] may consider and decide any matter arising out of the proceeding in which the order appealed against was passed notwithstanding that such matter was not raised before the [commissioner (appeal)] by the appellant. In D.B. ITA No.137/2018:- 1. Whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon ble ITAT was justified in uploading the decision of the CIT(A) regarding in deletion of the 63650000/- out of the total addition of ₹ 77800000/- made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that assets of the assessee company don t commensurate to premium charged and further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... justified in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) which erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 2.9 crore/- made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that neither any business activity was performed nor any business income has been shown by these concerns from whom share application money has been received, hence, it is the unaccounted money of the assessee company which have been introduced in the garb of share application money by these concerns which don t have any worth to invest at such high premium. In D.B. ITA No.139/2018:- 1. whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon ble ITAT was justified in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) which erred in deleting the addition of ₹ 3.4 crore/- ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fact and the circumstances of the case the learned ITAT is justified in upholding the decision of the CIT(A) deleting the addition of ₹ 24,20,479/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing the expenses as assessee has not started its business activity by ignoring the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals and Fertilizers Pvt. Ltd. reported in 227 ITR 172. In D.B. ITA No. 168/2018:- 1. Whether, on the fact and the circumstances of the case the Hon ble ITAT was justified in uploading the decision of the CIT(A) regarding deletion of ₹ 2,86,27,500/- made under section 56(1) of the Act ignoring the fact that assets of the assessee company don t commensurate to premium cha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
