https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458996 The MP HC dismissed an appeal against an ITAT order, ruling no substantial question of law arose under Section 260-A. The revenue challenged ITAT's decision annulling a Section 143(3) assessment, arguing it should have been framed under Section 153C based on seized financial documents being incriminating material. The HC held ITAT's order was well-reasoned and addressed all grounds raised. Finding no perversity in ITAT's fact-finding as the final authority, the HC refused to interfere with concurrent findings of CIT(A) and ITAT, concluding the appeal lacked merit for admission. en-us Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Sep 2024 15:25:33 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458996 The MP HC dismissed an appeal against an ITAT order, ruling no substantial question of law arose under Section 260-A. The revenue challenged ITAT's decision annulling a Section 143(3) assessment, arguing it should have been framed under Section 153C based on seized financial documents being incriminating material. The HC held ITAT's order was well-reasoned and addressed all grounds raised. Finding no perversity in ITAT's fact-finding as the final authority, the HC refused to interfere with concurrent findings of CIT(A) and ITAT, concluding the appeal lacked merit for admission. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458996