TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2010 (7) TMI 127
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN JUDGMENT MANMOHAN, J CM 11183/2010 Allowed, subject to all just exceptions. CM 11184/2010 This is an application for condonation of delay of 59 days in re-filing the appeal. For the reasons stated in the application, delay of 59 days in re-filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, application stands disposed of. ITA 762/2010 1. The present appeal h....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ll its contractual obligations with GEB, appellant entered into a joint venture agreement dated 22nd November, 1999 with M/s. Mahan Enterprises Ltd. (in short "Mahan"). Under the joint venture, appellant was to pay 2.8% of the claim amount settled between GEB and SECFL to Mahan as Mahan's share. In view of the said settlement, GEB disbursed service charges of Rs. 2,12,01,307/- to appellant. Out of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ant and Mahan and Clause 6 merely provided for disbursement modalities of the accrued share in revenue payable to Mahan. But the CITA(A) concurred with the Assessing Officer holding that Clauses 5 and 6 were to be read together. 6. The ITAT vide the impugned order has set aside the order of Assessing Officer and CIT(A) on this issue and directed the Assessing Officer to re-determine the share of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ice to the appellant as the matter had only been remanded to the Assessing Order for deciding the same de novo. 9. Having heard the parties we are of the opinion that ITAT by remanding the matter to the Assessing Officer for deciding the said case de novo has, in the process, even set aside the expenditure allowed by the Assessing Officer and CIT(A). We are of the view that ITAT has no power of ....