TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 38X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment years 2009-2010 and 2010-2011. In other words, he denied exemption for the assessment year 2008-2009. Held that: it was not open to the Director General of Income Tax (Exemption) to have refused exemption for the assessment year 2008-2009, when the petitioner had withdrawn the investment in India Exposition Mart Limited and placed the same in a scheduled bank in compliance with the provisions of Section 11(5) of the said Act. It was made clear in the order passed by this Court that the second application that would be moved by the petitioner pursuant to the order of the High Court, would be treated as having been filed on 22.05.2007 and was to be an entire substitute of the original application. – decided in favor of assessee - 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd that application shall be deemed to have been filed on 22.5.2007 when the application for according exemption was filed in the first instance. For all intents and purposes, this application will be treated as a substitute for the earlier application. The fresh application shall not prejudice, in any manner, the position which obtained in the financial year 2001-2002 to 2004-2005. The fresh application shall be made not later than eight weeks from today whereupon the Revenue shall pass an appropriate order. In view of the above, it is a logical corollary that the impugned order is set aside. It is so ordered. The Petition is disposed of." 3. A plain reading of the aforesaid order makes it clear that the only objection against the gran ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e amount lying with the India Exposition Mart Limited has been withdrawn by the petitioner within eight weeks, as indicated in the order of the High Court, and the money received has been deposited in current account No.00291131000407 with the Oriental Bank of Commerce, Mahipalpur Branch, Delhi, with effect from 31.03.2009. 4. Consequently, the petitioner had complied with the direction given in the said order of withdrawing the amount lying invested in India Exposition Mart Limited and in placing the said amount in a scheduled bank in accordance with Section 11(5) of the said Act. However, despite this having been done, the Director General of Income Tax (Exemption) did not grant exemption to the petitioner under Section 10(23C)(iv) fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
