Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
Reported in : (2004)83TTJ(All.)473
1. ITA Nos. 762 & 763/All/1999 by the Revenue are directed against the common order of CIT(A), Varanasi dt. 18th May, 1999 in the case of both the assessees-respondents in respect of block period from 1st April, 1986 to 13th Feb., 1997, Both the assessees-respondents have also directed CO Nos. 14 and 15/All/2000 in both the departmental appeals.2. ITA Nos. 304 & 305/All/2002 by both the assessees are directed against different orders of the CIT(A)-I, Kanpur dt. 14th Aug., 2002 passed under Section 158BC/154 of the IT Act, 1961.3. In both the cases of the assessees, undisclosed income was computed and thereafter it was bifurcated in the case of both the assessees percentage wise on the identical facts. Since all the matters relate to the same assessees on identical facts, therefore, all the matters were heard together and we dispose of the same by this common order.4. All the matters were directed to be taken up for out of turn hearing vide order dt. 7th Oct., 2002 passed in St...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
1. These four appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the common order of the CIT(A), Varanasi dt. 10th Jan., 2002, for the asst.yrs. 1993-94, 1994-95, 1995-96 and 1997-98 and are disposed of by a single order for the sake of convenience.These appeals were taken up by this Bench on 5th April, 2002, as the Registry has received copy of order dt. 21st March, 2002, of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the matter. It was directed by the High Court to the Tribunal to decide the aforesaid appeals very expeditiously preferably within three weeks from the date of communication of this order. As per above direction, we have preponed hearing and started hearing appeals from 17th April, 2002, on priority.2. The notices under Section 148 were issued for the asst. yrs.1993-94, 1994-95 and 1995-96 on 1st Aug., 1997, and as mentioned by the AO notices were served on 5th Aug., 1997. Notices under Section 142(1) requiring assessee to file return for asst. yr. 1997-98 was issued by ITO, Azamga...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
1. In these four appeals the assessee has, in addition to challenging the consolidated order of the CIT(A) with respect to various additions and findings on merits including as to whether income included in assessee's assessments did belong to assessee or the HUF styled as M/s Ram Dihal & Sons (HUF), Jaunpur, has challenged the very validity of initiation of the proceeding under Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act), by way of following grounds.Because the learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in upholding the validity of action under Section 147 and the assessment made thereunder.Because there existed no material which could lead to the 'formation of belief that as far as the appellant was concerned, his income had escaped assessment within the meaning of Section 147 of the Act, and consequently the initiation of proceedings thereunder as also the assessment made in pursuance thereof are void ab initio.2. The grounds on merits, except nature and ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Allahabad
1. This is an appeal by the assessee in which the assessee has challenged the assessment for the block period completed under the provisions of Chapter XIV-B of the IT Act, 1961 (hereinafter called the Act) on various grounds.Hearing of this appeal has been fixed on priority basis as directed by the Hon'ble High Court of Allahabad vide order dt. 16th March,1999.2. In the grounds of appeal enclosed along with the memorandum of appeal the assessee has listed as many as 9 grounds but at the time of hearing the assessee's learned counsel Shri S. K. Garg, withdrew Ground No. 3.1 and 3.4 which are dismissed as withdrawn.In these grounds the assessee has objected to the validity of the notice dt. 12th Dec., 1996, issued as required by the provisions of s.158BC of the Act.3.1. We have heard the assessee's counsel as well as the learned Addl.standing counsel.3.2. The counsel for the assessee first of all submitted that the notice required to be served upon the assessee as per the provisions of...
Tag this Judgment!