TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (6) TMI 1092
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f law, for our consideration: "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal failed to appreciate that in an order passed u/s. 263 where the assessment is not cancelled but directions are given to frame a assessment afresh on a specific issue? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal failed to appreciate that the revision order passed under section 263 dealt only with admissibility of deduction u/s. 10B and therefore, the assessment order which was subject matter of revision could be varied only to the extent of the directions contained in the order u/s. 263 of the Act? (c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....law at the time of hearing the appeal for admission. Unless of course, this reframing is also only at the instance of the Officer of the Department. 7 It what is submitted by Mr. Pinto, reflects the view of the Revenue, then it would be appropriate for it to revisit this practice and change it. 8 After hearing the parties and examining the impugned order, we reframed the questions of law, which arises for our consideration, by breaking question No.(c) above into two components as under: "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the Assessment Order passed consequent to the order passed in Revision under Section 263 of the Act, was beyond a scope of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Officer proceeded to pass a fresh order dated 24th December, 2009. However, in the fresh order, the Assessing Officer not only dealt with issue of exemption under Section 10B of the Act in relation to delay in realization of foreign exchange and referred the matter to the TPO but also dealt with the issue of reallocation of R & D Expenses for claiming deduction under Section 10B of the Act. 12 Being aggrieved with the order dated 24th December, 2009, the Respondent carried the matter in Appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. In its appeal, it inter alia, contended that Assessment Order passed, consequent to the order dated 27th September, 2007 passed under Section 263 of the Act, to the extent it is beyond the dire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the order of the Assessment Officer dated 24th December, 2009, was beyond the directions contained in the order dated 27th September, 2007 passed by the CIT under Section 263 of the Act and, therefore, without jurisdiction. Nor did it urge this issue at the hearing before the Tribunal. The Revenue's only challenge was on the issue of allowing the set off of R & D Expenses incurred in a non STIP Unit with STIP unit of the Respondent. 16 Re Question (a): - (i) We note that the Revenue has not challenged the finding of the CIT(A) that the Assessing Officer has gone beyond the scope of directions given by the CIT(A) in its order under Section 263 of the Act. The issue now being urged by the Revenue, that the Assessment Ord....