TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 1264
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2009-10. Since common issues are involved, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. First, we take up the appeal in ITA No. 2732/Ahd/2012 for AY 2008-09. The Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XX, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in directing the A.O. to verify whether any interest was received by the appellant on short term deposits and government securities which is not permitted u/s. 251(1) of the I.T.Act, 1961. 2) The learned A.O. has erred in passing the order giving effect to the CIT(A)'s order and there by made an addition of Rs. 8,45,268=00 which is ag....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he AO to add such interest under the head "income from other sources". 3. Ground Nos. 1 & 2 are inter-connected. Therefore these grounds are taken up together. 3.1. Ground No. 3 is with regard to levy of interest that being consequential is held accordingly. 3.2. Ground No. 4 is with regard to initiation of penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Act. During the course of hearing, ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that he does not wish to press the same. Therefore, on the basis of the statement made by the ld.counsel for the assessee, this ground is treated as not pressed. 3.3. Ground Nos. 5 & 6 are general in nature require no independent adjudication. 4. Now, the grounds that are left with us for adjudication are Grou....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....by the Hon'ble Tribunal and not by the ld.CIT(A). He relied on the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal (ITAT 'SMC' Bench Ahmedabad) in ITA No. 2747/Ahd/2012 for AY 2009-10 in the case of Shri Chhatrapati Sivaji Sahakari Mandali Ltd. vs. ACIT, dated 10/1/2014, wherein the identical facts, the case was restored to the file of AO to frame de novo assessment in accordance with law. We find that the direction given by the ld.CIT(A) to AO is on the basis of the judgement of the Hon'ble Apex Court rendered in the case of Totgars Co-operative Sale Society Ltd. vs. ITO reported at (2010) 322 ITR 283(SC). 5.1. After considering the totality of the facts and the case-law as relied upon by the ld.counsel for the assessee, we are of the con....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12 for AY 2009-10. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal. 1) The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XX, Ahmedabad has erred in law and on facts in directing the A.O. to verify whether any interest was received by the appellant on short term deposits and government securities which is not permitted u/s. 251(1) of the I.T.Act, 1961. 2) The learned A.O. has erred in passing the order giving effect to the CIT(A)'s order and there by made an addition of Rs. 12,91,128=00 which is against the facts, evidence, submission, explanation and information on record and same needs to be deleted. 3) The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in confirming action of the learned A.O. in....