| |
| The Tax Publishers2020 TaxPub(DT) 3787 (Mad-HC) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 260A
Where AO had passed a given effect to order under section 143(3) read with section 254 and such order was adverse to the assessee as the assessee was not able to establish anything and therefore, AO held that assessee had concealed the particulars of income and had no explanation worthwhile to offer, therefore, Substantial question of law was left open as issue had become academic in the case due to developments which have taken place during the pendency of this appeal.
|
Appeal (High Court) - Gold, bullion and cash found and seized in search proceedings - Non-availability of evidence - Substantial question of law
Assessee was a retail trader carrying on business in jewellery and a search operation was conducted on wherein gold, bullion and cash were seized. Assessment was completed under section 143(3) read with section 153B(1)(b) making addition towards undisclosed gold jewellery, undisclosed bullion and towards undisclosed income. The computation of undisclosed gold jewellery was referred to by Revenue by stating that this was done after considering the evidence produced by assessee before AO. It was further submitted by Revenue that assessee during the course of search was unable to give proper explanation for the source of cash and it was treated as undisclosed income. Held: Substantial questions of law need not be answered in the instant case as they have become academic. AO had passed a given effect to order under section 143(3) read with section 254 and such order was adverse to the assessee as the assessee was not able to establish anything and therefore, AO held that assessee had concealed the particulars of income and had no explanation worthwhile to offer. Substantial question of law was left open as issue had become academic in the case due to developments which have taken place during the pendency of this appeal.
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Directions issued
A.Y. : 2013-14
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|