2014 (2) TMI 1119

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n 254(2) of the Income Tax Act. The assessee/petitioner had in the relevant assessment years 1998-99 and 1999-2000 declared its income. During the course of enquiry it was conceded that profits were made by it relating to accommodation entry operations. They were shown in the credit side of the profit and loss accounts for the relevant years and in the income tax returns for those years. In the assessments, those amounts were added u/s 68 of the Act. The petitioner was aggrieved by the orders of the assessing officer and appealed to the CIT(A) and later unsuccessfully before the ITAT. Subsequently, it approached the ITAT u/s 254(2) seeking rectification of the order of the Tribunal that in both the years, even though the sum of Rs.6,24,000/....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....67) 66 ITR 462 (SC). The duty is limited to the points raised before it. It would be placing an impossible burden on the Tribunal if it is ordained to rule upon aspects and contentions which were not raised by the parties before it or to deal with pleadings, evidence or material to which its pointed attention was not drawn in the course of the proceedings, and which lies buried in the forest of papers filed by the parties. The present case is typical. The assessee did not raise the point that there was double addition in the sense that though the amount was shown in its profit and loss account and in the return of income, still the assessing officer made a separate addition. This was a question of arithmetic, yet it was not raised either be....