9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1159X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITAT, suffers from an error of jurisdiction and must necessarily be rectified. The CIT(A) and the ITAT have apparently ignored Section 153(1)(a) as well as judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. J.K.Synthetics Ltd., [2001 (2) TMI 17 - SUPREME Court] - The matter was restored for fresh adjudication. - Income Tax Appeal No. 214 of 1999 - - - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 1993 with retrospective effect from 01.04.1989 i.e., after delivery of the Hon'ble High Court judgments relied upon by the Hon'ble ITAT? Counsel for the revenue fairly concedes that the revenue has failed to frame a significant question, namely, that the Tribunal has failed to consider an argument raised as to the illegality of order passed by the CIT (A), setting aside the order passed under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... deal with this argument. We, therefore, proceed to frame a substantial question of law in the following term:- Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed an error of jurisdiction in failing to deal with the argument raised by the revenue that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not justified in setting aside the order passed under Section 154 of the Act? A perusal of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition so made still discloses a loss of income. In view of what has been recorded hereinabove, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned order and remit the matter to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench C , Delhi,, to decide the matter afresh and in accordance with law. Parties are directed to appear before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench C , Delhi, on 30.01.201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
