Back
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (AMRITSAR BENCH)
DR. M. L. MEENA, ACJ, SH. UDAYAN DAS GUPTA, JM
DARSHAN GARG (DECEASED) BATHINDA – Appellant
Versus
THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX BATHINDA – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. initial assessments based on agreements and previous case outcomes. (Para 5) |
| 2. legal arguments regarding double assessment and property valuation. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 3. court's ruling to prevent redundant additions in assessments. (Para 7 , 9 , 10) |
ORDER
Per: Udayan Das Gupta, JM
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) dated 27.01.2017 raising the following grounds of appeals:
GROUNDS OF APPEAL
“1. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in confirming the income assessed at Rs. 1,41,00,000/- by the AO vide order u/s 143(3) dated 12.03.2015.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in confirming the validity of proceedings initiat ed u/s 147/148 despite the fact that the AO failed to quantify the escaped income in the reasons recorded to initiate the pro ceedings.
3. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in confirming the addition of Rs. 1,31,25,000/- ma de by the AO, as discussed on page 28 of the assessment order and para 4 and 6 on page 6 & 8 of the appellate order.
4. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred on facts and law in confirming the addition of Rs. 7,00,000/- made by the AO, as discussed on page 28 of the assessment order and para 5 an
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
