- (1.) In all these appeals since identical questions of law and facts are involved, they are decided by this common judgment. For the convenience of the court, we have taken facts from Income Tax Appeal No. 140/2014.
(2.) By way of these appeals, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee.
(3.) This court while admitting the appeals framed the following question of law:- 1. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 140/2014 "Whether ITAT is perverse in deleting the addition of Rs.67,49,680/- on account of Capital gains, ignoring the incriminating documents seized fromthe residence of the assessee and other persons, admission of key persons of the Group u/s 132(4) and the valuation report of the DVO proving that on-money was received on sale of land by the assessee." 2. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 141/ 2014 "Whether the order of Tribunal is perverse in deleting the addition of Rs.69,12,400/- on account of capital gains on sale of land, ignoring the incriminating documents seized, admission of the key persons of the Group u/s 132(4), and the valuation report of the DVO, which proved that on-money was received on sale of land by the assessee?" 3. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.143/2014 "Whether ITAT is perverse in deleting the addition of Rs.76,81,215/- on account of Capital gains, ignoring the incriminating documents seized from the residence of the assessee and other persons, admission of key persons of the Group u/s 132(4) and the valuation report of the DVO proving that on-money was received on sale of land by the assessee." 4. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.144/2014 "Whether ITAT is perverse in deleting the addition of Rs.35,91,863/- on account of Capital gains, ignoring the incriminating documents seized from the residence of the assessee and other persons, admission of key persons of the Group u/s 132(4) and the valuation report of the DVO proving that on-money was received on sale of land by the assessee." 5. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.148/2014 "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Tribunal has not acted perversely in deleting the addition of Rs.4,19,82,789/- on account of long term capital gain, ignoring the incriminating documents seized from the residence of assessee and other persons, admission of key persons of the Group u/s 132(4) and the valuation report of the DVO proving that on-money was received on sale of land by the assessee?" 6. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.150/2014 "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Tribunal has not acted perversely in deleting the addition of Rs.77,20,722/- on account of long term capital gain, ignoring the incriminating documents seized from the residence of assessee and other persons, admission of key persons of the Group u/s 132(4) and the valuation report of the DVO proving that on-money was received on sale of land by the assessee? (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Tribunal has not acted perversely in not deciding the ground relating to deletion of addition of Rs.30,00,000/- made by the A.O. u/s 68 of the Act on account of unexplained cash credits?" 7. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No. 151/ 2014 "Whether ITAT is perverse in deleting the addition of Rs.67,26,150/- on account of Capital gains, ignoring the incriminating documents seized from the residence of the assessee and other persons, admission of key persons of the Group u/s 132(4) and the valuation report of the DVO proving that on-money was received on sale of land by the assessee." 8. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.157/2014 "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Hon'ble Tribunal has not acted perversely in deleting the addition of Rs.1,28,26,725/- on account of long term capital gain, ignoring the incriminating documents seized from the residence of assessee and other persons, admission of key persons of the Group u/s 132(4) and the valuation report of the DVO proving that on-money was received on sale of land by the assessee?" 9. D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.230/2016 "Whether the Tribunal is justified in law in deleting the disallowance of Rs.16,38,750/- made by the AO u/s 54B despite the fact that the assessee did not purchase new agricultural land in his name".;