Appeals partly allowed for statistical purposes, directing Assessing Officer to follow findings. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to follow the findings and orders given in the ...
Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
Appeals partly allowed for statistical purposes, directing Assessing Officer to follow findings.
The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals for statistical purposes, directing the Assessing Officer to follow the findings and orders given in the respective cases. Both appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, with the orders pronounced on 25th Jan., 2012. The matter was sent back to the AO for fresh consideration, following the order for the assessment year 2006-07.
Issues Involved: Appeal against the order of the ld.CIT(A) allowing deduction u/s 80IB(4) for the Assessment Year 2007-08.
Summary: 1. The appeals by the Revenue were directed against separate orders dated 19.3.2010 passed by the ld.CIT(A) for the Assessment Year 2007-08, involving a common issue.
2. The assessee, an individual deriving income from trading and manufacturing, claimed deduction u/s 80IB(4) of &8377; 35,77,971/-. The AO disallowed the claim citing failure to substantiate commencement of production before 31.3.2004 and lack of comprehensive manufacturing process. The ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim, leading to the Revenue's appeal before the Tribunal.
3. The ld. CIT(A) upheld the claim of the assessee, similar to the appellate order for the assessment year 2006-07.
4. The Revenue contended that the ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing the appeal without considering the failure to substantiate production commencement by the specified date and the nature of manufacturing activity.
5. Both parties agreed to set aside the issue to the AO's file due to similar cases in the assessee's group.
6. The Tribunal, considering the facts and anomalies, directed the AO to decide the issue afresh, following the order for the assessment year 2006-07. The matter was sent back to the AO for fresh consideration.
7. In another appeal, the parties agreed that the facts and grounds were similar to a related case, leading to a similar direction to the AO for fresh consideration.
8. The Tribunal partly allowed the appeals for statistical purposes, directing the AO to follow the findings and orders given in the respective cases.
9. Both appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, with the orders pronounced on 25th Jan., 2012.
Full Summary is available for active users!
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
