No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, GUWAHATI BENCH AT KOLKATA
Before: SHRI MANOMOHAN DAS & SHRI RAKESH MISHRA
order : 29-May-2025 ORDER PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: All these appeals filed by the assessee are against the separate orders of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central NER, Guwahati [hereinafter referred to as “the Ld. CIT(A)”] passed u/s 250 of the Income 5 The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal.” vi.
A.Y. 2018-19: 1 For that assessment order passed u/s 153C/143(3) is bad in law and liable to be quashed as no proper satisfaction has been recorded as required under the provision of I T Act. 2 For that additions made by the A.O. and upheld by the CIT (A) are bad in law as no incriminating materials has been found 3 For that the learned A.O. is not justified in disallowing interest of Rs.22,95,000/- on unsecured loan. 4 For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs. 1,01,25,690/- on account of suppression of sales. 5 The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal.” vii.
A.Y. 2019-20: “1 For that assessment order passed u/s 153C 143(3) is bad in law and liable to be quashed as no proper satisfaction has been recorded as required under the provision of I.T. Act. 2 For that additions made by the A.O. and upheld by the CIT (A) are bad in law as no incriminating materials has been found. 3 For that the learned A.O is not justified in disallowing interest of Rs.40.27,500 - on unsecured loan. 4 For that the learned A.O. is not justified in making addition of Rs.3.20.17,555/- on account of suppression of sales. 5 The Appellant craves the leave to take Additional Grounds and/or amend the above grounds of appeal at the time of hearing of Appeal.” viii.
A.Y. 2020-21: “1 For that assessment order passed u/s 153C/143(3) is bad in law and liable to be quashed as no proper satisfaction has been recorded as required under the provision of I.T. Act. 2 For that additions made by the A.O. and upheld by the CIT (A) are bad in law as no incriminating materials has been found.