2013 (11) TMI 1600

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....CO No.74/Ahd/2008 for the Assessment Year 2001-02 in the case of the assessee-Shri Saileshkumar Rasiklal Mehta and ITA Nos. 1510, 1511 and 1512/Ahd/2008 for the Assessment Years 2001-02,2002-03 and 2003-04 in the case of the assessee - Shri Kamleshkumar Rasiklal Mehta, the revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeals to consider the following substantial questions of law; 2.1 In Tax Appeal No. 977/2013, the revenue has proposed the following substantial questions of law; "(A) Whether the tribunal is right in law and on facts in upholding the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made under Section 68 of the Act of unexplained cash credit of Rs. 45,00,000/- in the bank account? (B) Whether the tribunal is right i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....at the time of assessment nor he cooperated in any manner whatsoever with the Assessing Officer in finalising the assessment by furnishing the books of account and other details?" 2.4 In Tax Appeal No. 980/2013, the revenue has proposed the following substantial questions of law; "(A) Whether the tribunal is right in law and on facts in upholding the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition made under Section 68 of the Act of unexplained cash credit of Rs. 5,78,779/- in the bank account? (B) Whether the tribunal is right in law and on facts in not appreciating the fact that the assessee never produced his books of account before the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment nor he cooperated in any manner whatsoev....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....equently, the CIT(A) deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act treating the aforesaid amount, except the amount of Rs. 10,000/- against the total amount of Rs. 45,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer in the case of Shaileshkumar Rasiklal Mehta in Tax Appeal No. 977/2013, as disclosed income. 3. Having heard Ms. Mauna Bhatt, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant and on perusal of the impugned common judgment and order passed by the ITAT as well as the finding given by the CIT(A) while deleting the additions made by the Assessing Officer, it appears that on appreciation of evidence and considering the fact that the additions made by the Assessing Officer routed through the B....