| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2014 SLG 1426 2014 SLD 1426 (2014) 364 ITR 692 |
Gujarat High Court
TAX APPEAL NO. 70 OF 2014, FEBRUARY 17, 2014
AKIL KURESHI AND MS. SONIA GOKANI, JJ
Nitin K. Mehta for the Appellant
TAX APPEAL NO. 70 OF 2014, FEBRUARY 17, 2014
AKIL KURESHI AND MS. SONIA GOKANI, JJ
Nitin K. Mehta for the Appellant
Commissioner of IncomE tax, AhmedabaDIII
VS
Kamlaben Sureshchandra Bhatti
Law:
Section:
ORAL ORDER Akil Kureshi, J. - Revenue has challenged the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad ("Tribunal" for short) dated 19th July, 2013 raising following questions for our consideration :- '(A) "Whether the ITAT erred in law in holding that there is no violation of Rule 46A in the facts of the case without actually examining the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly when the CIT (A) did not pass specific order disposing of the petition for admission of additional evidence files by the assessee and the objection of the Assessing Officer, as held in Dinesh B. Parikh v. CIT [2011] 202 Taxman 110 (Cal.) and Asstt. CIT v. Mohan Singh [ITAT jd.] DRT 497 ?" (B) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the impugned order of the ITAT is erroneous and perverse and bad in law and facts insofar as it accepts the CIT(A)'s order despite it being admitted position on record that neither the source of funds in the cash book have been examined and corroborated by any authority nor any reason or correlation being established between the repeated withdrawals and deposits and the deletion are made based on the uncorroborated explanation of assessee ?" (C) "Whether the ITAT erred in not adjudicating the factual issue of non-reflection of certain properties in the Balance sheet of the assessee files before it which was raised by the DR and not setting aside the case where the case to Assessing Officer to examine all issues particularly in view of the specific facts of the case where the assessee has not filed all details before the Assessing Officer and incomplete examination of the case by the CIT (A) ?" (D) "Whether the ITAT erred in not setting aside the case to the Assessing Officer for de novo examination of the source of funds particularly the cash deposits in Banks which came to light through information returns, cash payment of Rs. 59,73,000/- to the seller of property in Satyagarah Chhavani, payment of Rs. 4,64,350/- and Rs. 10,90,417/- in cash for registration and the source of huge amounts paid by the assessee for purchase of properties during the year ?" (E) "Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in confirming the…
Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492