9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1066X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... NGAN, JJ. For The Applicant-Appellant : Ms. Radhika Suri, Senior Advocate with Mr. Manpreet Singh Kanda, Advocate For The Revenue : Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate and Mr. Ajiteshwar Singh, Advocate ORDER AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) This order shall dispose of above mentioned two review applications. Since common questions of law and facts are involved therein, they are being decided by this common ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l assessment year can't be re-fixed? iv) Whether the ld. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law and facts in holding that definition of initial assessment year does not allow the undertaking to claim deduction under Section 80IC at the rate of 100% upon their substantial expansion?" The present application has been filed by the Assessee under Order 47 Rule 1 and 2 of the Code of Civil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in the present case what has emerged is that the original judgment of this Court (decided on 06.09.2018) was based on the decision of the Supreme Court in M/s Classic Binding Industries (supra). However, in the subsequent decision in M/s AARHAM Softronics (supra) the Supreme Court specifically noticed that in M/s Classic Binding Industries (supra), it omitted to take note of the definition of &# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 80IC of the IT Act for the assessment year 2011-2012 (in RA-CR-28-2019 in ITA-240- 2016 (O&M)) and assessment year 2010-2011 (in RA-CR-27-2019 in ITA- 449-2015 (O&M)) are answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. The remaining part of the judgment is maintained. Since the review applications have been decided, the pending CM Applications, if any, also stand disposed of. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
