9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 83X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aken any ground in respect of treatment of incentive subsidy - On perusal of the order of the CIT (A) also, it is not borne out that any additional ground is taken by the assessee, which was not adjudicated by him. For substantiating this ground, it was incumbent upon the assessee to show that any application was moved by it before the learned CIT (A) and the same was received in his office. Neith ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 1988-89. On 13.03.2009, a Coordinate Bench of this Hon'ble Court has admitted the appeal on the following substantial question of law: 1. Whether the respondent no. 1 was justified in not adjudicating upon the ground of treatment of Rs.13,75,740.86 representing incentive realized by way of additional quota of free sugar, under Sampat Incentive Scheme, as Capital Receipt, in the present ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of free sugar under Sampat Incentive Scheme, as Capital Receipt. Being aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal. With this background, heard Sri R. A. Shankdhar assisted by Sri Sanjeev Shankdhar, learned counsel for the appellant - assessee. He submits that the additional ground pertaining to the subsidy under the Sampat Incentive Scheme was taken up before CIT (A) but the same was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eatment of incentive subsidy. There is nothing on record to show that the additional ground taken by the assessee as is alleged in ground no.1. On perusal of the order of the CIT (A) also, it is not borne out that any additional ground is taken by the assessee, which was not adjudicated by him. For substantiating this ground, it was incumbent upon the assessee to show that any application was move ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
