SMT. ANJU BANGER,KANPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, KANPUR

ITA 169/LKW/2016Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow06 September 2019AY 2005-069 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) failed to decide the assessee's ground regarding the denial of cross-examination opportunities. Therefore, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order confirming disallowances and additions to income. The Tribunal had previously recalled its own order to address grounds related to the denial of cross-examination and the basis of additions made under Section 68.

What were the issues?

Whether additions made under Section 68 were valid without providing the assessee an opportunity to cross-examine parties whose statements were used against them.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 68

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, LUCKNOW BENCH “A”, LUCKNOW

Before: SHRI. A. D. JAIN & SHRI T. S. KAPOOR

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Seth, FCA
For Respondent: Shri C. K. Singh, D.R

PER A. D. JAIN, V.P.: This is assessee’s appeal against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-I, Kanpur, dated 18/1/2016, for assessment year 2005-06, taking the following grounds: 1) That the learned CIT (Appeals) has erred in law and on fact in confirming disallowance of Rs.27,760/- being adhoc/estimated disallowance of 10% out of various expenses under the heads Sales Promotion, Travelling Expenses, Conveyance Expenses, General Expenses, Generator Rent & Maintenance expenses, Repairs and Office Expenses 2) That the learned CIT (Appeals) has further erred in law and on fact in ignoring the fact that the assessee had not disputed the disallowance out of telephone expenses and that the bills and vouchers in

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 68

All 29,931 judgments and leading authorities on Section 68 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →