2010 (3) TMI 1156

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n received by the Revenue to pursue this appeal. Assessee being a public sector undertaking, approval of the Committee on Disputes is mandatory to pursue this appeal. In this view of the matter, this appeal of the Revenue is liable to be dismissed for want of approval from COD. We, however, hold that the appellant shall be at liberty to request for recall of this order and restoration of this appeal for adjudication thereof on merits, in case approval of the COD is received later. 3. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. Assessee's Appeal ITA No.681/Hyd/08 : Assessment year 2005-06 4. Ground of appeal No.1 of the assessee is general in nature . Grounds of appeal No.2.1 to 2.5 are as under- 2.1 The l .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... e in respect of other securities be allowed. 5. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that these grounds relate to the issue of disallowance of depreciation/fall in the value of investment, and this issue is covered in favour of the assessee with the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2003-04 in ITA No.1232/Hyd/06 dated 28.11.2008. 6. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand, relied on the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A). 7. We have considered the rival submissions. The issue involved in these grounds of appeal being covered in favour of the assessee with the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he assessee with the decision of the Hyderabad Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the assessment year 2003-04 vide para 9 thereof, it is decided in favour of the assessee for the year under appeal as well, and the grounds of appeal No.3.1 to 3.3 of the assessee are allowed. 12. Grounds of appeal No.4.1 to 4.2 are as under- 4.1 The learned CIT(A) erred in sustaining the assessment of prior period expenditure of ₹ 5.64 lakhs without telescoping the prior period income of ₹ 26.52 lakhs. 4.2 The authorities below failed to note that the prior period expenditure was unanticipated and that the prior period income was taxed which had not accrued in the year and in any event, authorities below were not correc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X