2011 (1) TMI 275

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ner.   Mr. T.K. Joshi, Standing Counsel for the respondent.   ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J.   1. This order will dispose of I.T.C. No.65 and 66 of 1998, as both the petitions are stated to be inter-connected.   2. I.T.C. No.65 of 1998 has been preferred by the assessee under Section 256(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act") seeking direction for referring fo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... justice?   (iv) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, finding of the Tribunal could be termed as perverse and conclusion vitiated, having been arrived on the basis of both relevant and irrelevant material altogether ignoring vital material convassed during hearing proceedings?   (v) (i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the conclusion arrived at by ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ue procedure. The Tribunal affirmed the order of the CIT(A). The petitioner, thereafter, sought reference under Section 256(1) of the Act, which has been declined.   4. We have heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that enhancement of addition was not justified as discrepancies in record noticed by the survey party were duly explained. 6....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ws in the absence of any positive evidence with the appellant. As regards the contention of ld. counsel that six farmers never unloaded their agril. produce at the shop of the appellant, it is noted that this plea was taken only after the enhancement notice was issued and on the last date of hearing i.e. 7.2.1991. Such a plea was never taken before Ld. ITO. Six Affidavits of such farmers are not e....