TMI Blog2014 (11) TMI 1200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal (supra) as well as following the principle of consistency, we remand the grounds raised in the present appeal also with identical directions given by the Tribunal in the AYs 2006-2007 and 2007-2008 to the file of the AO for adjudicating them afresh. Accordingly ground raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No. 2572/Mum/2012 - - - Dated:- 19-11-2014 - SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the Appellant : Shri Vijay Mehta For the Respondent : Shri Asghar Zain ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee opnm 17.4.2012 is against the order of the CIT (A)-22, Mumbai dated 30.11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the CIT (A) grossly erred in upholding the stand of the Assessing Officer that since the Appellant did not have the intention of carrying on business, the assets of the Appellant ceased to be commercial assets. 3. Re: Treatment of other income amounting to ₹ 3,86,542/- as income from other sources: 3.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in holding the contention of the AO by treating other income of ₹ 3,86,542/- as income from other sources. 4. Re: Disallowance of expenditure pertaining to the business activity. 4.1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, CIT (A) grossly erred in upholding the disallowance by the AO of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 65 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard he brought our attention to the affidavit dated 13.4.2012 filed by the Managing Director of the assessee and read out the relevant contents of the same which read as under: 1 .. 2 The CIT (A) passed the order dated 30.11.2011 which was received on 14.12.2012 by Mr. Sanjay Diwedi and the same was passed on to Mr. Prashant Shelar, Accounts Officer of the Appellant Company. Mr. Prashant Shelar left the company on 3.2.2012 and failed to handover the said order to the tax advisors / Senior Executives for filing an appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The appellant came to know about the CIT (A) order when the Tax Advisors and Authorize ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... considering the submissions of the assessee, CIT (A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Aggrieved with the decision of the CIT (A), assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 7. During the proceedings before us, Ld Counsel for the assessee filed a copy of the orders of the Tribunal in assessee‟s own case vide ITA No.9039/M/2010 (AY 2006-07) dated 10.7.2013 and ITA No.9240/M/2010 (AY 2007-2010) dated 15.7.2014, wherein the identical issues were adjudicated by the Tribunal and the issues were remanded to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication in both the years. 8. On the other hand, Ld DR relied on the order of the AO / CIT (A). 9. We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
