Loading...

⚠ โœ•
❮ Top
☎ Help
Draft upto 3 replies to a
tax notice โ€” FREE ๐ŸŽ‰ โœ•

150 credits ยท 30 days

โ€ข Basic Search โ†’ 1 Credit
โ€ข Advanced Search โ†’ 3 Credits
โ€ข Drafter โ†’ 20 to extract + 25 per issue
(โ‰ˆ upto 2-3 drafts on us)

Already used our earlier 20-Credit Demo?
You are still eligible for this new 150-Credit Demo.

Activate your FREE Demo โ†’
☰
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
Call Us / Help / Feedbackโœ•

Contact Us At :

✉ E-mail: [email protected]

✆ Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters 0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2015 (3) TMI 841

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....jape ORDER This Appeal is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, Mumbai dated 12th September, 2012. 2. Mr. Pinto appearing for the Revenue would submit that the concurrent findings of fact cannot be said to be binding, as the Assessing Officer established that it is the Assessee who has paid the sum and in cash for purchase of a shop. The det....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....upreme Court does not mean that the Commissioner and the Tribunal based their conclusions only on the observations in the Hon'ble Supreme Court Judgment. Having found that the Assessing Officer did not take into consideration the cross examination of one Kantilal Patel, which revealed that the only consideration received for sale of the shop and to the extent of 454.50 square feet to the Asses....