TMI Blog2012 (5) TMI 683X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Hussain Qureshi, CIT-II For the Assessee : Shri K.P.Kumar, Senior Advocate O R D E R PER SHRI GEORGE GEORGE, K. JM; These appeals are instituted by the department against the separate orders of the CIT(A) both dated 25-02-2010 in respect of assessment years 2004-05 2005-06. 2. Since common issue is involved in these appeals and they pertain to same assessee, they were heard together and disposed of by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience and brevity. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows; The assessee is a nationalized commercial bank. For the assessment year 2004- 05, the return of income was filed on 28-10-2004 declaring a total income of ₹ 611,96,02,505/-. Regular assessment w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rning exempt income is not proper and deleted the same. The revenue being aggrieved is in appeal before us. 5. The revenue has raised identical grounds in the memorandum of appeal for both the assessment years and they read as follows; 1. The order of the ld. CIT(A) is against law and facts of the case. 2. The ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowances on account of estimated expenditure on earning income exempt u/s 10(23G) by placing reliance on the following; a) Rajasthan State Warehousing Corp. Vs CIT (2000) 42 ITR 450 b) Wimco Seedings (P)Ltd., Vs DCIT(2007) 107 ITD 267(Del.Bench of ITAT) c) Maruti Udyog Ltd., Vs DCIT(2005) 92 ITD 119 (Del.Bench of ITAT) 2.2 The ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate the fact that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nable to controvert the submissions made by the learned DR. 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. As rightly pointed out by the learned DR that the Tribunal in assessee s own case in ITA No.504(B)/2004 dated 13-01-2012 from a regular assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the IT Act, 1961 had considered the identical issue and remanded the matter back to the file of the AO for fresh consideration. The Tribunal directed the AO to follow the ratio laid down in the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/s Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co.,Ltd., The relevant findings of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case in ITA No.504(B)/2004 dated 13-01-2012 reads as follows; 32. We have heard the rival ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to decide the issue afresh by following the ratio of the decision of the Bombay High Court in M/.s Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co.,Ltd., after giving effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee. This issue is allowed for statistical purpose . 8. Since identical issue has been considered by the Tribunal and the matter has been remitted back to the Assessing Officer and there being no change in the factual situation for this assessment year namely AY: 2004-05, we deem it fit and proper to remit this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for de-novo consideration and to apply the ratio of the judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of M/.s Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Co.,Ltd.,. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
