2013 (8) TMI 1179

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV:  This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A) on various grounds, which are as under:- 1. Because the CIT(A) has erred on facts and in law in enhancing the income without giving opportunity in terms of section 251(2) of the Act, 1961. Failure to give opportunity vitiates the assessment as well as the appellate order....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Gulati vs CIT dt.19.10.2011. 5. Because the CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the difference between a "revised return" and a "correction of return" and hence erred in holding that the appellant has furnished inaccurate particulars of income, which observation being bad in law be deleted. 2. During the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ctivity during the year under consideration, the revenue expenditures claimed by the assessee were disallowed by the ld. CIT(A). In doing so the income was further enhanced by Rs. 2,05,987. Since it was done in the presence of the assessee, no notice was required to be specifically served upon the assessee in this regard. 4. Having heard the rival submissions and from a careful perusal of recor....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... showing cause against enhancement to the assessee. If he fails to afford an opportunity to the assessee, enhancement made by him is not sustainable in the eyes of law. In the light of these facts, enhancement made by the ld. CIT(A) is not sustainable as it was done without issuing a show cause against enhancement to the assessee. We, therefore, find no merit in the additions. Accordingly, we dele....