Back
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (SURAT BENCH)
Shri Pawan Singh, J, Shri Bijayananda Pruseth, ACJ
Hetal Brijesh Ukani – Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. assessment reopening based on alleged cash transactions. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. unsigned satakhat lacks evidentiary value. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. tax authority's reliance on third-party information. (Para 5 , 6 , 11) |
| 4. repeated legal precedents on evidential requirements in income tax cases. (Para 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 5. final ruling in favor of the appellant. (Para 12 , 13) |
PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
1. This appeal by the Hetal Brijesh Ukani, being legal heir of Brijesh P Ukani, is directed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC)/learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short, the ld. CIT(A)] dated 02/02/2023 for the Assessment Year (AY) 2008-09. Following grounds of appeal have been raised by the assessee.
“1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the ld. AO in assuming jurisdiction to pass such order against the Appellant. In the facts and circumstances of the case, that order passed by the ld. AO is void ab initio and it deserves to be set aside.
2. Alternatively and without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of the ld. AO in reopening the assessm
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
