2014 (7) TMI 506
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... ORDER Per Shri Kul Bharat, Judicial Member : Through this Miscellaneous Application filed on 21/10/2013, the assessee sought rectification of the Tribunal's order (ITAT "D" Bench Ahmedabad) passed in ITA No.2066/Ahd/2010 for Asst.Year 1999-2000, dated 04/10/2013. 2. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the ITA No.2066/Ahd/2010 pertaining to Asst.Year 1999-2000 was taken up to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....for both the years were similar. The contention of the ld.counsel for the assessee is that the grounds taken in ITA No.2066/Ahd/2010 for AY 1999-2000 are not similar. Ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that this Tribunal had restored both these appeals back to the file of ld.CIT(A) for decision afresh. It is contended by the ld.counsel for the assessee that the ld.CIT(A) is not deciding the ITA....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oth the lower authorities have not appreciated evidences and submissions made by the appellant. Ld.CIT(A) ought to have deleted addition made by the AO. 3. The ld.CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 7,80,000/- out of the total addition of Rs. 9,68,500/- made by AO in respect of unsecured loan u/s.68 of the Act. Both the lower authorities have failed to....
TaxTMI