9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 1368X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ilar circumstances, the assessee's appeal was allowed for the assessment year 1994-95. In the result, this appeal is allowed and the question of law raised in this appeal is answered in favour of the appellant-assessee and against the Revenue - Tax Appeal No. 505 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 4-12-2014 - K. S. Jhaveri And K. J. Thaker, JJ. For the Appellant : R. K. Patel, Advocate For the Respondent : Pranav G. Desai, Advocate JUDGMENT K. S. Jhaveri, J. 1. This is an appeal by the appellant-assessee, seeking to challenge the order of the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Rajkot Bench (for short, the Tribunal ), dated November 21, 2008, rendered in I. T. A. No. 75/Rjt/2007 for the assessment year 1994-95, whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... quence to addition of ₹ 1,39,69,385 being confirmed in quantum proceedings before the Tribunal ? 4. Mr. Patel, learned advocate for the appellant-assessee, submitted that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal committed grave errors in dismissing the appeals of the assessee, inasmuch as they failed to appreciate the material on record in its proper perspective. He, further, submitted that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal ought to have appreciated that addition of certain amount is not a ground to impose penalty on the assessee. He, then, invited our attention to a decision of this court in Tax Appeal No. 1062 of 2005, dated November 5, 2014, wherein, under more or less sim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as substantially erred in dis regarding the fact that business is being carried on by the appellant and hence, the loss incidental to business is allowable under section 28 and the provision of section 37(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 can not override the provision of section 28 ? 3. The facts giving rise to the appeal are that : The appellant an individual deals in bullion and gold jewellery. On January 12, 1999, a search was carried out on the residential as well as the business premises of the appellant and substantial quantities of bullion was found and seized by the Income-tax Department. On January 18, 1999, notice under section 158BC was issued and in response, the return for the block period was furnished on March 4, 1999 by t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is required to answer this tax appeal in favour of the assessee. 5. Having heard learned advocates appearing for the parties, this appeal is answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. 6. The appeal is allowed to the aforesaid extent.' 5. In view of the aforesaid decision, since the present appeal is also governed by the same set of facts, this appeal also deserves to be answered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. Present appeal is therefore allowed to the aforesaid extent. 5. In above view of the matter, the facts of present appeal being similar in nature, will be governed by the decision of this court in Tax Appeal No. 1062 of 2005. 6. In the result, this appeal is allowed and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
