Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 16 (0.28 seconds)
Shri Dharamshibhai H. Patel,, ... vs The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(4),, ... on 24 June, 2019 cites

Commissioner Of Income-Tax, U.P vs Kanpur Coal Syndicate on 30 April, 1964

Further the Ld. CIT(Appeals) has apparently ignored to examine the contents of page.45 of Annexure "A-1" so as to arrive at a reasonable conclusion that page No. 45 of Diary Annexure "A-1" is a record of imaginary / superfluous or real transactions. His power is co-terminus with that of Assessing Officer. He could has also given an opportunity of cross-examination. Support is derived from the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (1964) 53 ITR 225 (SC). We note that non-allowing cross- examination has not been taken as main argument by the assessee against the order of the Assessing officer which has been accepted by the Ld. CIT(A) without considering the legal position that if for a certain reasons, the Assessing Officer was not able to allow cross- examination, then he is duty bound to allowed the same. In our considered view, not allowing cross-examination of JVD and AAS is only a procedural defect and cannot vitiate the assessment order and cross-examination. Witnesses, JVD and AAS, before filing the return by the assessee could not have served any useful purpose because contents of the return would have been relevant for considering the examination and cross-examination. The assessee chose the file the return of block assessment almost two years, after issuance of notice u/s 158 BD of the I.T. Act, 1961, thus leaving no worthwhile time to the IT(SS)A No.199/Ahd/2014 Dharmshibhai H. patel Block Period - 01.04.1990 to 20.10.2000 -8- Assessing Officer to follow strictly the rule of evidence by conferring the opportunity of cross-examination.
Supreme Court of India Cites 13 - Cited by 429 - Full Document
1   2 Next