RAJKUMARI G. JAIN,MUMBAI vs. ITO 24(2)(3), MUMBAI

The present appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of CIT(Appeals)-34, Mumbai dated 11/03/2014, which pertains to the assessment year 2005-06. The assessee has challenged the impugned order on the following effective grounds: “1. NATURAL JUSTICE 1.1 The learned Commissioner of income taxes (appeals) – Mumbai, “Ld. CIT (A)’ erred in not granting proper, sufficient and adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant while framing the appellate order. 1.2 It is submitted that, in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the appellate order so framed be held as bad and illegal, as:

(i) The same is framed in breach of the principles of natural Justice; and (ii) The same is passed without application of mind to the facts and the submissions brought on record by the appellant.

WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE

2.1 The Ld.CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the AO in making addition of Rs. 10, 21, 395/– under the head “Income from other sources’’, against the capital gain declared by the Appellant, with respect to sale of the shares. 2.2 It is submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, no such action was called for. 2.3 Assuming – but not admitting – that any addition was called for, it is submitted that in the facts and the circumstances of the case, and in law, the computation of the addition is not in accordance with the law. 3.1 The Ld. CIT (A) erred in not adjudicating the ground with respect to non-granting of direction u/s 54 of the act, as claimed by the Appellant. 3.2 It is submitted that in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law the Appellant was entitled for deduction under section 54 of the Act.