9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (2) TMI 16X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ket, New Delhi. The assessee challenged the order of the Assessing Officer, both on the ground of jurisdiction as well as on the merit of the addition. – held that - it is a settled legal position that, recording of satisfaction by the Assessing Officer, having jurisdiction of the searched person, that some undisclosed income belongs to a person other than a searched person, is mandatory before pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated the 31st January, 2008 in IT (SS) A No.185/DEL/2006 for the block period 1st April, 1989 to 27th July, 1999. 2. A search under Section 132 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the said Act‟) had been conducted at the residential premises of Sh. R.K. Gupta and Sh. Devender Gupta and their company named M/s Chintpurni Const ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1,44,9413/- on account of investment in the property No.HS-11, Kailash Colony Market, New Delhi. The assessee challenged the order of the Assessing Officer, both on the ground of jurisdiction as well as on the merit of the addition. 3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] vide his order dated 2nd April, 2006 held that the Assessing Officer had jurisdiction to assess the assessee un ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 158 BD can be initiated against such other person. In this case, after going through the records the Tribunal came to the conclusion that the letter dated 14th August, 2002 predicated on which the proceedings under Section 158 BD of the said Act had been initiated by the Assessing Officer of the assessee "did not show that he was satisfied that the investment had been made by the assessee". The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
