TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1192X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... would be bound by the circulars issued CBDT. Considering the fact that, in respect of two cases, pertaining to the two assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, the petitioner has succeeded before ITAT, and other Appeals are also pending, and those Appeals should also be heard by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals -11. So far as the assessment order, dated 06.09.2016, for the years 2010-11 to 2012-13 is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the certified copy of the order is yet to be received by them, and they would challenge the same before the Tribunal. Thus the Appeals filed by the petitioner for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13, have already been disposed of, and the impugned a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Petition, it is seen that, it is an elaborate Petition, giving various facts under different heads, and, apart from referring to the clarifications issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) etc., reference has also been made to the earlier orders of assessment, in particular, the assessment orders passed with regard to the years 2007-08 and 2008-09, wherein, the petitioner succeeded before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). 4. Therefore, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would pray that the demand may be stayed, and the Appeal filed by the petitioner may be directed to be disposed of by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11. 5. At the time, when the Writ Petition was entertained, i.e., on 18.08. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earing, the learned Standing Counsel for the respondent-Income Tax Department pointed out that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 11 is considering the Appeal Petition filed by the petitioner for other assessment years, and infact, orders have been passed for the assessment years 2010-11 to 2012-13, by order, dated 06.09.2016. However, the learned Standing Counsel would submit that, in the light of the circular issued by CBDT, the petitioner should be directed to remit 15% of the tax, as quantified in the assessment order, and therefore, the order passed by the first respondent to the said effect, is reasonable. 7. After hearing the learned counsel appearing for the parties, and perusing the materials placed on record, it is seen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in toto. Therefore, to do such exercise, reasons have to be recorded, and there is no such reasons assigned in the impugned order presumably, because, the first respondent, being a Subordinate Officer, would be bound by the circulars issued CBDT. 10. Considering the fact that, in respect of two cases, pertaining to the two assessment years 2007-08 and 2008-09, the petitioner has succeeded before ITAT, and other Appeals are also pending, and those Appeals should also be heard by the Commissioner of Income Tax Appeals -11. So far as the assessment order, dated 06.09.2016, for the years 2010-11 to 2012-13 is concerned, it is submitted by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner that the certified copy of the order is yet to be recei ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
