9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1702X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ate For Respondent. The Court : The assessee has applied for review of order dated 30th April, 2014 dealing with ITAT no.126 of 2013 and G.A.no.3461 of 2013 (CIT Vs.Peerless Hospitex Hospital and Research Centre Ltd. Kolkata). Mr.Khaitan, learned senior counsel appears on behalf of the assessee and draws attention to the following portion of the order, review of which is sought:- "A sum of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cted the contention of the revenue. It is in these facts that Mr. Dudharia submitted that the judgment of the learned Tribunal is altogether unmeritorious and should be set aside. Mr. Bagchi, learned advocate appearing for the assessee, however, submitted that the aforesaid payment was made by the assessee to NNC who have got exemption under the law from payment of any tax and therefore, the tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and submission made on behalf of his client. In the appeal preferred by the Revenue, the Tribunal accordingly upheld the order of CIT(A). He submits further, an application for production of additional evidence in appeal was filed by the assessee in this Court which was also dealt with by the order for review. He draws attention to a copy of the written submissions filed by his client before CIT( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t from anything else." Mr. Dudheria, learned counsel appears on behalf of Revenue but does not dispute that this written submission was filed before CIT(A). In view of the aforesaid, we are satisfied that this piece of evidence could not be produced by the assessee at the time order dated 30th April, 2014 was made. We have by our order dated 31st January, 2017 in ITA no.36 of 2014 (CIT vs Centra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
