9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (1) TMI 284X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g the last factfinding authority in the hierarchy of authorities. By way of illustration we can point out that in paragraph 11 of the order passed by the Tribunal, the findings rendered by the CIT(A) has been adopted by the Tribunal verbatim as its own findings and so much so, even the directions given by the CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer has been copied verbatim. We find that though the Tribunal has recorded that it had heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative of the assessee as well as the department representative, the submissions made by the authorised representative have not been noted or recorded. Tribunal has stated that the authorised representative has given detailed submission on behalf of the assessee w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... :- 5-1-2023 - HON BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND HON BLE JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA Appearance : Mr. Om Narain Rai, Adv. for the revenue. Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. Ms. Arati Agarwal, Adv. Ms. Rosy Banerjee, Adv. Mr. Binayak Gupta, Adv. for the assessee The Court : These appeals filed by the revenue as well as the assessee under section 260A of the Income tax Act, 1961 (the Act) are directed against the order dated October 20, 2006, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal `A Bench, Kolkata (Tribunal) in ITA 1221/Kol./2006 and ITA 1045/Kol./2006, for the assessment year 2002-03. The appeal being ITA 173 of 2007 was admitted on 7th May, 2008 on the following substantial questions of law :- Whether o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (viii) Interest on borrowed fund under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act without considering the Supreme Court ruling reported in 288 ITR 1(SC). 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case learned Tribunal was justified in law in making the addition of Rs.22,93,311/- in respect of unutilized MODVAT credit for the relevant previous year without even considering that the treatment for accounting of MODVAT credit applied by the appellant was in accordance with the approved method of accounting duly approved by the ICAI and has been regularly followed by the appellant and also has been accepted by the revenue and without even considering the decision reported in 261 ITR 275 (SC) and the decision of the Delhi Bench of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he learned Tribunal being the last factfinding authority in the hierarchy of authorities. By way of illustration we can point out that in paragraph 11 of the order passed by the Tribunal, the findings rendered by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] has been adopted by the Tribunal verbatim as its own findings and so much so, even the directions given by the CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer has been copied verbatim. Further, we find that though the learned Tribunal has recorded that it had heard the submissions of the learned authorised representative of the assessee as well as the department representative, the submissions made by the authorised representative have not been noted or recorded. The learned Tribunal has stated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
