K.S.JHAVER,J. - (1.) In all these appeals common question of law and facts are involved hence they are decided by this common judgment.
(2.) By way of appeal No. 20/2016, the appellant has assailed the judgment and order of the tribunal whereby tribunal has dismissed the appeal of the assessee. In appeal No. 118/2017, the tribunal has partly allowed the appeal filed by the assessee and in appeal No. 136/2017, the tribunal has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee.
(3.) This court while admitting the appeals framed following substantial questions of law:- Appeal No. 20/2016 admitted on 25.03.2017 "Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jaipur was justified in law in upholding the order passed by the respondent under Section 263, when the original assessment order was passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, after due verification of all the documents on record which is merely change of opinion and nothing else? " Appeal No. 118/2016 admitted on 17.05.2017 "Whether the Ld. ITAT was justified in disallowing the exemption under Section 54B of the act without appreciating that the funds utilized for the investment for purchase of the property eligible under Section 54B belonged to the Appellant only and merely the registered document was executed in the name of the wife and further, the wife had no separate source of income? " Appeal No. 136/2017 admitted on 19.5.2017 "Whether the Ld. ITAT was justified in disallowing the exemption under Section 54B of the act without appreciating that the funds utilized for the investment for purchase of the property eligible under Section 54B belonged to the Appellant only and merely the registered document was executed in the name of the wife and further, the wife had no separate source of income? ";