2018 (9) TMI 1327

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aw as well as contrary to the established judicial principles. (ii) Whether in the absence of any material evidence, Ld. ITAT was correct in law in reviving the order of Assessing Officer even if provisions of Sec 145(3) were applicable. (iii) Whether the impugned Judgment/ order passed by learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is perverse as well as erroneous in not adjudicating the issue in accordance with the propositions laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court and Hon'ble High Court. (iv) Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal can pass an order by ignoring the percentage of net profit ratio for previous Assessment Year of Appellants business. (v) Whether the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred while passing the....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....hat the defects being minor ought not to have led to rejection of book results under Section 145(3) of the Act. On an appeal by the Revenue, the Appellate Tribunal on an issue: "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) has erred in by holding that provisions of Section 145(3) are not applicable ignoring the facts that assessee has failed to produce the complete bills & vouchers for expenses many of them being unverifiable", by taking into consideration the fact that the Assessing Officer of unverifiable vouchers and unexplained expenses allegedly incurred by the assessee and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) not adverting to the respective deficiencies found fault with the order by the Comm....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... appeal, and it is dismissed accordingly. No costs." In M. Janardhana Rao Vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (AIR 2005 SC 1309), it is held:- "16. An appeal under Section 260A can be only in respect of a 'substantial question of law'. The expression 'substantial question of law' has not been defined anywhere in the statute. But it has acquired a definite connotation through various judicial pronouncements. In Sir Chunilal V. Mehta & Sons Ltd. v. Century Spinning & Mfg. Co. Ltd., (AIR 1962 SC 1314), this Court laid down the following tests to determine whether a substantial question of law is involved. The tests are: (1) whether directly or indirectly it affects substantial rights of the parties, or (2) the question is o....