9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 869X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R 1. The present Income Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 seeks to challenge the judgment and order dated 03.8.2009 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur in Appeal No.365/JU/2005. 2. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the assessee had earlier come before this Court in D.B. Income Tax Appeal No.111/2006 and the said appeal came to be a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deduction was allowed on account of depreciation since the assessee being aggrieved by the fact that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal earlier had determined net profit rate @ 8% while accepting the rate @ 8%, as the rate was essentially aggrieved by the fact that the Tribunal had further directed no separate deduction on account of depreciation. 4. It appears appeals from the earlier order, thi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 245 ITR 527, therefore, this Court in the earlier appeal while allowing the assessee's appeal had specifically directed the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to decide the matter afresh while keeping in view the observations and directions given in the aforesaid judgment dated 03.7.2008 in the case of M/s. Shri Ram Jhanwar Lal Vs. I.T.O., Bikaner & Ors. 6. It appears on perusal of impugned order here ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it had failed to apply the judgment rendered by this Court in the case of M/s. Shri Ram Jhanwar Lal (supra) nor the judgment rendered in the case of Jain Construction (supra). 8. Consequently, the present appeal is allowed to the extent of modifying the order of the Tribunal for determining the profit rate @ 8% instead of 12.5% on gross contract receipt as earlier determined by the Tribunal subje ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
