9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 649X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the finding of the Tribunal. Accordingly, the first substantial question of law is answered in favour of the assessee/respondent. Disallowance of losses of the carton division to be set off to arrive at business profits for the calculation of benefit u/s 80 HHC - assessee maintained separate accounts - Held that:- On the 2nd substantial question of law raised, the Tribunal has considered the same on merits in the light of the decision of this Court in Rathore Brothers case (2001 (10) TMI 72 - MADRAS High Court) holding that the losses of the carton division do not have to be set off to arrive at business profits for the calculation of benefit u/s 80 HHC on the ground that the assessee maintained separate accounts and remanded the issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 001-2002, the assessee claimed exemption u/s 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. However, the assessing officer reworked the same and levied tax appropriately. Aggrieved over the said assessment, the assessee preferred appeals before the CIT (Appeals). However, the CIT (Appeals) on the basis of the decision of the Supreme Court in DCIT - Vs - IPCA Laboratories (266 ITR 521), reworked the amount of tax and since a negative figure was arrived at, issued a show cause notice to the assessee and after granting sufficient opportunity of hearing, passed an order of enhancement of the assessment holding that the assessee was not entitled to any benefit u/s 80HHC of the Income Tax for the relevant years. 3. Aggrieved over the order passed by the CIT (Ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... verriding effect over all other sections in Chapter VIA. It is the further submission of the learned standing counsel that the decision of this Court in Rathore Brothers (supra) relied on by the Tribunal is on a different set of facts and is not applicable to the present case. The learned standing counsel for the Revenue, on the aforesaid plea, prayed for setting aside the order of the Tribunal. 5. Heard the learned standing counsel appearing for the appellant and perused the materials available on record. Though the appeal has been admitted and notice has been served on the respondent, there is no representation on behalf of the respondent and, therefore, this Court is proceeding to hear the appeals on merit. 6. As could be seen from ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear that on the two issues raised, with regard to one of the issue, the issue was answered in favour of the assessee and with regard to the other issue, the issue was remanded back to the Tribunal for fresh consideration, which has been extracted above. The grievance of the appellant/Revenue that the Tribunal has no right to review its own order, cannot be sustained in view of proviso to Rule 24 of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, which gives power to the Tribunal to recall its order. It is evident from the records that the reason for the Tribunal in recalling its own order was due to the fact that the assessee was not noticed, which was brought to the notice of the Tribunal by way of miscellaneous applications and, thereafter, the Tribunal co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
