Gujarat High Court Case Information System
Print
TAXAP/1426/2008 3/ 3 ORDER
IN
THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
TAX
APPEAL No. 1426 of 2008
=============================================
THE
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III - Appellant(s)
Versus
MRINALKANTI
M BHAUMICK - Opponent(s)
=============================================
Appearance :
MRS
MAUNA M BHATT for Appellant(s) : 1,
None for Opponent(s) :
1,
=============================================
CORAM
:
HONOURABLE
THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN
and
HONOURABLE
MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI
Date
: 22/06/2009
ORAL
ORDER
(Per
: HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. K.S.RADHAKRISHNAN)
Heard
learned counsel for the appellant.
Admit.
Issue
notice of admission to the respondent on the following questions of
law.
(A) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in holding that
statement recorded during search is not conclusive on stand alone
basis and that the statement on oath has to be considered along with
supporting material while framing block assessment?
(B) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in not giving any
finding as to whether the retraction of statement made after 22
months from the date of initial admission statement is bonafide or
otherwise?
(C) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by CIT(A) in directing to delete the addition of
Rs.5,67,000/-?
(D) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by CIT(A) in directing to delete the addition of
Rs.3,24,225/- made on account of alleged gifts received from close
relative?
(E) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by CIT(A) in directing to delete the addition of
Rs.94,249/- made on account of unexplained deposits in bank account?
(F) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by the CIT(A) in directing to delete the addition of
Rs.58,000/- made on account of unexplained investment in FDRs?
(G) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by CIT(A) in directing to delete the addition of
Rs.1,50,000/- made on account of unexplained investment in FDRs in
the name of Rapti Bhamick?
(H) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by CIT(A) in directing to delete the addition of
Rs.3,00,000/- made on account of unexplained investment in furniture
and fixtures?
(I)
Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in
confirming the order passed by CIT(A) in directing to delete the
addition of Rs.1,00,000/- made on account of unexplained investment
in household equipments?
(J) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by CIT(A) in directing to delete the addition of
Rs.1,91,857/- made on account of unexplained investment in shares?
(K) Whether
the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the
order passed by CIT(A) in directing to delete the addition of
Rs.1,30,200/- made on account of unexplained investment in shares in
the name of Rapti M Bhaumick?
(K.S. RADHAKRISHNAN, C.J.)
(AKIL
KURESHI, J.)
kailash
Top