MANISH MAHESHWARI,GWALIOR vs. JCIT RANGE-2, GWALIOR
In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed
ITA 308/AGR/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Agra26 Sept 2018AY 2010-11
Bench: Him Though Specific Request Was Made To Admit The Same. Ground No. 2 (I) Because The Ld. Cit(A) Has Wrongly, Illegally & Arbitrarily Confirmed Theaddition Of Rs. 67,530/- Made By The Assessing Officer U/S 40A(3) Of The Income Tax Act. (Ii) Because The Ld. Cit(A) Has Legally Erred In Rejecting The Appellant'Sspecificsubmissionand The Unavoidable Circumstances Under Which The Payment Wasmade. Ground No. 3 (I) Because The Ld. Cit(A) Has Wrongly, Illegally & Arbitrarily Confirmed An Addition Of Rs. 1,11,038/- Made By The Assessing Officer By Disallowing The Claim Of Interest Paid Holding The Same To Be Not Allowable U/S 57(Iii) Of The Income Tax Act.”
Section 133Section 40A(3)Section 57Section 68
10 had taken place, so as to verify his creditworthiness and genuineness of transaction. But in response to this letter also, no reply was received.
3.5.2Therefore genuineness of transaction and creditworthiness of the creditor Shri
Kaushal Kishore Shrivastava is not proved, as required under section 68 of the Act.”
4. In appeal, the ld. CIT(A) has not admitted
