9911796707
TMI Blog2001 (7) TMI 291X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvenience. 2. At the time of hearing before us the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the issues raised in ground Nos. 1 and 2 of both these appeals are covered by the decision of this Bench in assessee's own case for asst. yr. 1990-91 in ITA No. 35/Jp/94 vide order dt. 27th April, 2000. He also submitted that ground No. 3 relating to the levy of interest under s. 220(2) is consequen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the present case. He also cited the decision of Jaipur Bench of ITAT in the case of Zafrul Hassan Iraqi vs. ITO (1998) 61 TTJ (Jp) 387 : (1999) 68 ITD 276 (Jp) in support. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material on record. We have also gone through the cases cited by the representatives of both the parties carefully. 5. In the case of Prem Agencies vs. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he merits of the case for a decision by the Tribunal. 6. From the aforesaid observation of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court, it becomes abundantly clear that ratio of the said decision applies only in the case where the appellant has disputed merely the action of the first appellate authority in setting aside the issue in the ground raised before the Tribunal and the relevant issue is not co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee's own case for asst. yr. 1990-91 and respectfully following the same, we allow ground Nos. 1 and 2 raised by the assessee in these appeals. Accordingly, the AO is directed to delete the entire additions made on these counts. 9. Ground No. 3 relating to the levy of interest under s. 220(2) is consequential and the AO is directed to allow consequential relief to the assessee. 10. Ground Nos. 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
