2013 (7) TMI 518

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e i.e., Nirav (Thaltej) Owners Association. Both these appeals are being decided by way of common order for the sake of convenience. 2. Both these appeals are related to same assessment year (AY) i.e., AY 2007-08 and are directed against two separate orders of same Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-III, Ahmedabad ('CIT(A)' for short) both dated 13-04- 2010. Grounds raised by Revenue in the case of Shri Pranbhai S Fultariya in ITA No. 2302/Ahd/2010 are as under:- "1) The ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts and circumstances of the case in directing the Assessing Officer to restrict the total receipts to Rs.3,01,15,915/- as against that of Rs.7,23,44,731/- estimated by the AO and thereby restricting the addition @ 8% of the redu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....on on protective basis as worked out by him in the case of Shri Pranbhai S Phultariya in whose case, the substantive addition has been reduced." 4. In both cases, none appeared on behalf of assessee on the appointed date of hearing although two separate applications for adjournment are available on record having been filed by one Shri Aseem L Thakkar, Chartered Accountant (CA) but no Power of Attorney from these two assessees in favour of this CA is available on record and hence, these adjournment applications are not maintainable and therefore ignored. 5. Ld. SR-DR of the Revenue submitted that assessment year was framed by the Assessing Officer u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act') because no bo....