2017 (12) TMI 1573

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER 1. By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order of the Tribunal whereby the Tribunal has remitted back the matter for reconsideration. 2. Learned counsel for appellant has framed following substantial question of law:- "i. Whether, on the facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT is right in restoring back the matter to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nation in the year 2006-07. This observation of the Ld. CIT(E) is not correct. The assessee had filed the details, he submitted that even if it is presumed that investment in the modes which are not as per Sec. 11(5) of the Act, then the entire exemption of the Trust shall not go, and only the income from said investment should be made liable for charging tax at the maximum marginal rate. The Ld. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o dispute with regard to the fact that if the assessee has not made investment as per the provisions of Section 13 of the Act, the authorities can withdraw exemption u/s 11 & 12 of the Act. In the present case the assessee has not disputed the fact that the shares of M/s Om Metal Infra Project Ltd. would not fall in the category of shares in a public sector company. 5.3 Ld. Counsel for th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 12-8-2016 in assessee's own case. In that year the issue of rescinding the notification u/s 10(23C)(VI) was not under consideration. The only issue which requires to be considered whether the Ld. CIT(E) was justified in withdrawing the notification and benefit u/s 10(23C) (vi) of the Act, on the basis that the assessee has not made investment in the specified assets. There is no dispute with ....