| Citation(s) |
|---|
| 2010 SLG 1830 2010 SLD 1830 (2010) 323 ITR 237 |
Punjab and Haryana High Court
IT APPEAL No. 989 OF 2008 (O& M), JULY 22, 2009
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND MRS. DAYA CHAUDHARY, JJ.
Kamal Sehgal for the Appellant Rajesh Kotoch for the
Respondent
IT APPEAL No. 989 OF 2008 (O& M), JULY 22, 2009
ADARSH KUMAR GOEL AND MRS. DAYA CHAUDHARY, JJ.
Kamal Sehgal for the Appellant Rajesh Kotoch for the
Respondent
M.P. Singh
v.
Income Tax Officer
Law:
Section:
Section 2(1A) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Agricultural income - Assessment year 2000-01 Where assessee claimed agriculture income from sale of safeda trees and produced documentary evidence in respect thereof and Assessing Officer did not believe evidence of assessee, and both Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal also gave concurrent finding that the bills relied upon by assessee were not genuine, their findings did not call for interference [In favour of revenue] Where the assessee claimed agriculture income from sale of safeda trees and produced documentary evidence in respect thereof and Assessing Officer did not believe the evidence of the assessee, and both Commissioner (Appeals) and Tribunal also gave concurrent finding that the bills relied upon by the assessee were not genuine, their findings did not call for interference. Kamal Sehgal for the Appellant Rajesh Kotoch for the Respondent JUDGMENT Adarsh Kumar Goel, J. - The assessee has preferred this appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act") against the order dated June 13, 2008, passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "A", New Delhi, in I.T.A. No. 1419/DELHI/04 for the assessment year 2000-01, proposing to raise the following substantial questions of law : "1. Whether the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse or not as the Tribunal has not appreciated the evidence produced by the appellant to show that the appellant had 20 acres of land and he cultivated safeda trees on the land which were sold by him and the agriculture income of Rs. 5 lakhs was shown;" 2. Whether the order passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is sustainable in view of the fact that the same is based on surmises and conjectures ? 3. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) that the assessee has not been ableβ¦
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