9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1596X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2016 for the assessment years 2007-08 and 2010-11. 2. The assessee has filed these appeals by raising the following substantial questions of law: "TCA.No.880 of 2018 : i. Whether in law, the Tribunal was right in remanding the issue of deduction under Section 10A of the Act back to the files of the respondent to once again examine the issue in the light of CBDT Circular No.1 of 2013 without appreciating that the said exercise has already been undertaken by the respondent vide order passed under Section 143(3) read with Section 254 dated 27.1.2014 pursuant to the order passed by the Tribunal in ITA.No.907/Mds/2013 ? And ii. Whether, in law, the order of the Tribunal suffers from perversity as it has ignored the factual finding of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee in the light of Circular No.1 of 2013 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) and decide the same after giving due opportunity to the assessee. TCA.No.880 of 2018 : 5. This is the second round of litigation before the Tribunal. In the earlier round, the Revenue was aggrieved by the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the disallowance of deduction under Section 10A of the Act. The Tribunal, by order dated 31.7.2013, remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer to re-examine the claim, as the Revenue placed reliance on the said Circular. The operative portion of the order dated 31.7.2013 reads as follows : "We have examined the rival contentions and gone through the case file. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the transaction was construed as a mere splitting up and reconstruction of business. 7. Aggrieved over the same, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A), who recorded in paragraph 4 of his order dated 03.2.2016 about the directions issued by the Tribunal while remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer and in particular, with reference to the said Circular of the CBDT. The discussion starts from paragraph 14 of the order. Ultimately, the CIT(A) concluded that there was no discrepancy in the value of the assets transferred through slump sale by the transferor company to the assessee and since the entire assets of the undertaking were found to have been transferred to the assessee on lock, stock and barrel basis, there wa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... effect, the parameters required to be examined by the Assessing Officer under the said Circular were examined and in the opinion of the Assessing Officer, the case of the assessee cannot be accepted. This was reversed by the CIT(A). Therefore, the Tribunal can very well decide the correctness of the order passed by the CIT(A) instead of remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for a fresh consideration, as, already, such an exercise was done by the Assessing Officer. Furthermore, the order of remand passed for the assessment year 2009-10 is now pending before the Dispute Resolution Panel. Therefore, in the fitness of things, it is for the Tribunal to decide the matters, since this issue arises in the first year, which is the assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
