9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 247X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see stood explained. In such an event, the question of estimation of income adopted by the Assessing Officer, being one of the recognized methods of determination of income, could not be found fault as rightly observed by the Tribunal. Therefore, we do not find any perversity in the finding of the Tribunal, so as to answer the first question of law in favour of the Revenue. The second questi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal is correct in law in setting aside the order of the Commissioner passed u/s.263 of the Income-tax Act, 1961? 2. Heard Mr. J.V. Prasad, learned Senior Counsel for the appellant Department. 3. A search and seizure operation was carried out at the residential and business premises of the respondent on 31.01.2006. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lling upon the assessee to show cause as to why the assessment orders for the period from 2000-01 to 2006-07 should not be cancelled. The assessee gave written submissions to the proposal. Thereafter, the CIT passed orders under Section 263 of the Act on 22.02.2010, setting aside the orders of assessment with a direction to examine the issues raised in the show cause notice. 6. As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer rejected the books of accounts of assessee and finally determined the income for each year at 8% of the gross contract receipts, clear of all deductions. 8. In other words, the income determined by the Assessing Officer was far more than the income returned. To be precise, the income determined by the Assessing Officer was ₹ 71,96,607/- as against the return ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
