2016 (9) TMI 1615

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the Revenue on 26.9.2014 is against the order of the CIT (A)-34, Mumbai dated 17.7.2014 for the assessment year 2011-2012. In this appeal, assessee raised the following grounds which read as under:- "1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) erred in allowing deduction u/s 80IB(10)....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sue stands covered in favour of the assessee in assessee‟s own case by virtue of the order of the Tribunal for the earlier assessment years, Ld Counsel for the assessee filed a copy of the order of the Tribunal in ITA No.2898/M/2010 (2006-07) and others, dated 4.6.2014. He read out the relevant paras 18 and 19 of the said Tribunal‟s order. 3. After hearing both the parties and on pe....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....be dismissed. We order accordingly. Thus, Ground no.1 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 5. Regarding Ground no.2 relating to the date of completion of the project, also it is the contention of the Ld Counsel for the assessee that the same stands covered and the CIT (A)‟s decision given in para 3.4 of his order at page 32 is relevant in this regard. It is the finding of the CIT (A) that ....