9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ely. He has stated that the said order of the Tribunal dated 26.9.2012 be recalled and the appeals be decided afresh in consonance with the provisions of section 254 of the Act. 2. In the applications, the assessee has stated that the issue in the appeals filed by the assessee relates to claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act with regard to the profits derived from construction and development of housing project. The said appeals were heard together along with the cross-appeals filed by the department for both the assessment years under consideration (being ITA No.8726/Mum/2010 for AY- 2007-08 and 5986/Mum/2011 for AY-2008-09). The assessee has stated in the applications that it was indicated at the time of hearing that the issue invol ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he applications. The assessee has also further substantiated the above stand by citing the number of cases in the subsequent four pages of the applications, for the sake of brevity we do not consider it necessary to mention those decisions while considering these applications of the assessee. 3. At the time of hearing, the ld. AR besides placing reliance and referring the contents of the applications also submitted that the cases cited by the assessee and referred in paper book No.II have not been discussed specifically in the impugned order of the Tribunal. The ld. AR further submitted that the placing of reliance on the decision of the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Thistle Properties (P)Ltd(supra) without giving an opportun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of hearing, the ld. AR submitted that the assessee has also filed appeals u/s 260A of the Act before the Hon'ble Bombay High Court against the impugned order of the Tribunal being Income Tax Appeal No.228 and 229 of 2013 and the Hon'ble High Court by its two orders both dated 18.3.2013 have admitted the substantial question of law. The ld. AR filed a copy of the said order of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court before us and the question which have been admitted by the Hon'ble High Court in both the appeals are as under : "a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was justified in law and on facts in denying the deduction to the appellant under section 80IB(1) of the Income Tax Act as claimed without appreciati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s exactly been done in this case". In view of the above we are of the considered view that these Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee to recall the order of the Tribunal dated 26.9.2012 do not survive particularly when the Hon'ble High Court is seized of the matter by admitting the question of law in the appeals filed by the assessee. A similar view has also been taken by Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Lupin Limited (formerly known as Lupin Laboratories Ltd V/s ACIT in MA Nos.311 and 312 /Mum/2012 arising out of ITA No.2060 & 2061/Mum/2005 (AY-1998-99 and 1999-2000) dated 15.3.2013, to which one of us (AM) is also a party. In above case, the Miscellaneous Applications filed by the assessee were dismissed st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
