TMI Blog2018 (7) TMI 1626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tions given in the first order dated 29.10.2010 of the Tribunal. The Assessing Officer was obliged to strictly follow directions and decide issues as directed by the Tribunal. It is not open to the Assessing Officer to rake up new issues which were never the subject matter of the controversy in the first round of litigation and ignore the directions of the Tribunal to examine claim of the Respondent in respect of two issues. Thus, in these facts, we see no reason to entertain this Appeal. It may also be pointed out that Mr. Pinto the learned Counsel for the Revenue very fairly states that the dispute on merits stands concluded in favour of the Assessee and against the Appellant-Revenue. This by the decisions of this Court in CIT v. Happy ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct was not completed by 31.3.2008. In Appeal, the Tribunal by its order dated 29.10.2010 set aside the order of the Assessing Officer and restored it to him for deciding the above two issues for grant of benefit of Section 80IB(10) of the Act. This in accord with the decision of its Special Bench in the case of Brahma Associates 119 ITD 255. 4. The Assessing Officer while giving effect to the order dated 29.10.2010 of the Tribunal under Section 143(3) read with Section 254 of the Act has now rejected the benefit of Section 80IB(10) of the Act on new grounds i.e. other conditions of Section 80IB(10) of the Act. These new grounds of rejection were not subject matter under Section 80IB(10) of the Act in the first round of litigation leading ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tine manner which causes lot of inconvenience to the tax payers and such a practice should be deprecated. With these observations, for the reasons given by the learned CIT(A), we hold that the appeals filed by the Revenue deserve to be dismissed in limine. We order accordingly. 7. The above observations of the Tribunal in the context of the present facts are unexceptional. The officers of the Revenue cannot defy directions of the Tribunal and agitate new issues which result in unnecessary harassment and inconvenience to taxpayers. The Assessing Officer was bound by the directions given in the first order dated 29.10.2010 of the Tribunal. The Assessing Officer was obliged to strictly follow directions and decide issues as directed by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
