9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 276X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ER P.C.:- 1. This Appeal by the Revenue under section 260A of the Income Tax Act 1961 (the Act) challenges a common order dated 21st November 2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai. The impugned order of the Tribunal dealt with AYs 2005-06, 2006-07 and 2007-08. The present Appeal relates to the order of the Tribunal for the AY 2007-08. 2. Mr Malhotra, learned counsel for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... umstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the deletion of addition of Rs. 1,32,495/- made on account of excess allotment of area to Hindustan Candle Manufacturing Co.Pvt.Ltd. While purchasing development rights from the said Company ?" 3. So far as questions (A) and (B) above are concerned, Mr Malhotra, learned counsel for the Revenue very fairly states that the i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of law. 5. Accordingly, questions (A) and (B) are not entertained. 6. So far as question (C) is concerned, we find that the Revenue's contention that the amount of Rs. 1,32,000/- has to be added being the sale of excess area to M/s Hindustan Candle Manufacturing Co. Pvt.Ltd. leading to an increase in the profits of the Respondent - Assessee. However, both the CIT (Appeals) and the Tribunal, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
