PHILIP KOSHY,DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The CIT(A) have grossly erred on facts and in law in passing the impugned appellate order without giving a proper and sufficient opportunity to the assessee to be heard. The order is passed in violation of principles of natural

The AO also grossly erred on facts and in law in passing the impugned assessment order without giving a proper and sufficient opportunity to the assessee to be heard. The order is passed in violation of principles of natural justice.

The CIT(A) grossly erred on facts and in law in upholding the action of the AO to disallow the claim of the assessee U/s 54 and grossly erred in upholding addition of Rs 1,08,23,892/- made by the AO on this account.

The CIT(A) grossly erred on facts and in law in upholding the addition of Rs 1,08,23,892/- without properly appreciating the true nature and spirit of Sec 54.

That the CIT (A) has erred in not appreciating that on the given facts and circumstances the assessee is entitled to claim U/s 54.

The CIT(A) has grossly erred in law and on facts in holding that the assessee did not furnish the details of payment received on sale of two properties . This observation is illegal, bad in law, without jurisdiction and contrary to the fact on record.

The various observations made in the assessment order and the CIT(A) order against the assessee are illegal, bad in law, based on surmises and conjectures and contrary to the facts and material on record.

That the explanations filed before the CIT(A) and the material available on record has not been considered judiciously and interpreted legally. The additions upheld cannot be justified by any material on record.

That the additions are unjust, illegal, arbitrary and highly excessive. Without prejudice to the grounds above, the additions should be reduced substantially.

That the assessee reserves the right to raise additional grounds and / or amend, alter the grounds above.”