TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1420X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... find that the Tribunal has not done so. In paragraph 4 the Tribunal has simply reproduced the decision of the CIT(Appeals)and thereafter referred to the decision of this Court in case of Quepem Urban and has dismissed the Appeal. Thus the inquiry into the factual position, which the learned Counsel for the parties agree is necessary before the legal principle is to be considered, is not done by the CIT(Appeals) as well as the Tribunal. Therefore, before we consider what is the effect of the admission of the Special Leave Petition against the decision of this Court in Quepem Urban and the legal position enumerating from Quepem Urban, the factual foundation must be established as regards the nature of the business of the Respondent. Thu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... other aspect held that total taxable income of the Respondent/Society is ₹ 62,73,130/- and the tax thereupon payable is ₹ 25,73,960/- . 3. An appeal was filed by the Respondent/Society challenging the order passed by the Assessing Officer, to the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) accepted the case of the Respondent/Society that it is not a bank and the TDS provision therefore, do not apply to the Respondent/Society and addition of ₹ 32,84,449/- was accordingly directed to be deleted and on this ground the appeal of the Respondent/Society was allowed by order dated 24 August 2015. The Revenue filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal challenging the order passed by the CIT(Appeals). Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amed is answered in the negative i.e. in favour of the appellant and against the respondent-revenue. 5. The learned Counsel for the Revenue contended that a Special Leave Petition challenging the decision in the case of Quepem Urban Co-operative Credit Society has been admitted by the Apex Court on 5 October 2015. Reliance is also placed by the Revenue on the decision of Citizen Co-operative Society Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-9(1) Hydrabad [2017]84 taxmann.com114 (SC). The learned Counsel for the Respondent/Assessee on the other hand submitted that merely because the special leave petition has been admitted does not mean that there is the law laid down by this Court in Quepem Urban Co-operative Credit Societ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the order of the Assessing Officer and to the decision of this Court in Quepem Urban. There is no scrutiny on facts, which was necessary since the CIT was reversing the decision of the Assessing Officer denying the benefit to the Respondent/ Assessee. When the Revenue filed an appeal to the Tribunal challenging a decision adverse to them, the Tribunal was expected to scrutinize the decision of the CIT(Appeals). Here again, we find that the Tribunal has not done so. In paragraph 4 the Tribunal has simply reproduced the decision of the CIT(Appeals)and thereafter referred to the decision of this Court in case of Quepem Urban and has dismissed the Appeal. 8. Thus the inquiry into the factual position, which the learned Counsel for the parti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
