SH. ARASHPREET SINGH. S/O.LATE.SH. GURMAIL SINGH,MUKTSAR vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX .CIRCLE-II, BATHINDA
Appeals are disposed of in the terms and observation made as above
ITA 64/ASR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar25 May 2023AY 2014-15
Bench: Dr. M. L. Meena & Sh. Anikesh Banerjee
For Appellant: Sh. Parikshit Aggarwal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S. R. Kaushik, CIT-DR
Section 147Section 148Section 151(2)Section 250(6)Section 282Section 69A
292C of the Act. Meaning thereby, the AO or the Ld. CIT(A) failed to
establish the disputed income based on corroborative documentary
evidence in lieu of the alleged incriminating diary No. “SGF-XIV” although it
may be impounded during the course of survey from the business
premises. It is pertinent to mention the undisputed fact that the alleged
transaction/entries