Inox India Ltd.,, Baroda v. The Jt.CIT.,Spl.Range-2,, Baroda

MA 74/AHD/2009 | 1999-2000
Pronouncement Date: 08-01-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 7420524 RSA 2009
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number MA 74/AHD/2009
Duration Of Justice 9 month(s) 27 day(s)
Appellant Inox India Ltd.,, Baroda
Respondent The Jt.CIT.,Spl.Range-2,, Baroda
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 08-01-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 08-01-2010
Assessment Year 1999-2000
Appeal Filed On 12-03-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI J.M. AND SHRI D.C.AGARW AL A.M. M.A. NO.72/AHD/2009 73/AHD/2009 74/AHD/2009 & 75/ AHD/2009 IN ITA NO.756/AHD/2001 AND 1830/AHD/2001 823/AHD/2003 & 1063/AHD/2003 ASSESSMENT YEARS: 1997-1998 1998-1999 1999-2000 INOX INDIA LTD. ABS TOWERS 4 TH FLOOR OLD PADRA ROAD BARODA V/S JT. CIT (ASST.) SPECIAL RANGE-2 AAYKAR BHAVAN RACE COURSE CIRCLE BARODA-390 007 PAN NO.AAAC14416-P (APPLICANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE/APPLICANT : SHRI S.N.SOPARKAR SR. ADV. FOR DEPARTMENT/RESPONDENT : SHRI M.C.PANDIT SR.DR O R D E R PER SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI J.M. THESE MISC. APPLICATIONS BY ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED A GAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH DATED 23.01.2009 FOR THE ABOVE ASST. YEARS. 2. WE HAVE HEARD LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES OF BOTH THE P ARTIES PERUSED THE FINDINGS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW AND CONSI DERED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. LD. COUNSEL FOR ASSESSEE REFERRED TO PARA 6 AND 7 OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL WHILE REST ORING THE ISSUE ON GROUND NO.4 RELATING TO CONSIDERATION OF LEASE RENT INCOME DERIVED FROM INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECT ION 80HHC AND 80IA OF THE ACT TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) DIRECTE D TO RECONSIDER IN VIEW OF DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF EN TERPRISING ENTERPRISES 2 VS. DCIT [293 ITR 437] HOWEVER THE SAID DECISION IS NOT APPLICABLE TO THE MATTER IN ISSUE. HE HAS THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT T HEIR APPEARS MISTAKE APPARENT ON RECORD AND FRESH DIRECTION MAY BE GIVEN IN THE MATTER. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE MATTERS WE ARE OF THE V IEW THAT NO FRESH DIRECTION IS REQUIRED IN THE MATTER BECAUSE THE ISS UE IS RESTORED TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) FOR RECONSIDERATION. THE TRIBU NAL HAS NOT DIRECTED THE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) TO EXAMINE THIS ISSUE IN THE L IGHT OF DECISION OF THE SUPREME COURT AS REFERRED TO ABOVE. IT WOULD MEAN THAT THE ISSUE IS OPEN BEFORE LEARNED CIT(APPEALS) TO RECONSIDER THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ABOVE OBSERVATIONS THE MISC. APPLICATIONS STAN DS DISPOSED OFF. 5. AS A RESULT ALL THE MISC. APPLICATIONS ARE DISP OSED OFF AS INDICATED ABOVE. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 8 TH JANUARY 2010. SD/- SD/- (D.C.AGARWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 08/01/2010 PARAS* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE RESPONDENT 2. THE DCIT (APPELLANT). 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ITAT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// DY.R/AR ITAT AHMEDABAD