- (1.) Heard Sri Manish Misra, learned counsel for appellant and Sri Pradeep Agarwal, Advocate for respondent.
(2.) This appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the "Act, 1961") has arisen from judgment and order dated 07.08.2013 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench 'A', Lucknow (hereinafter referred to as the "Tribunal") in I.T.A. No. 475/LKW/2011 for Assessment Year 2002-03.
(3.) The appeal was admitted on following substantial questions of law: "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in dismissing the departmental appeal ignoring the fact that the addition in respect of provision for gratuity amounting to Rs. 42,04,167/- stands confirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal itself, that denotes that the assessee had filed inaccurate particulars of its income? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in dismissing the departmental appeal ignoring the fact that amount added or disallowed in computing the total income is deemed to represent the concealed income, as held by Apex Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi, Vs. Atul Mohan Bindal, 2009 9 SCC 589? (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and dismissing the departmental appeal ignoring the scope of Section 271(1)(c) which has been elaborately discussed by the Apex Court in Union of India Vs. Dharmendra Textile Processors, 2008 13 SCC 369; in Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi Vs. Atul Mohan Bindal as well as in Mak Data P. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-II Civil Appeal No. 9772 of 2013 (decided on 30th October 2013 (SC).";