9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (3) TMI 1098X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestors (Bombay) Ltd. V/s ACIT [2013 (5) TMI 580 - ITAT MUMBAI ] - Held that:- In view of the fact that the impugned order of the Tribunal does not deal with its decision in J. K. Investors (supra) relied upon by the appellantassessee in support of its submission as recorded in the impugned order itself makes the impugned order a nonspeaking order and, therefore, in breach of principles of natura ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d 10th July, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ( Tribunal ). The impugned order dated 10th July, 2013 relates to Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The appeal is admitted on the following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, was the Tribunal justified in referring to its coordinate Bench decision in J. K. Investors (Bomb ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income to exempt income of the appellant assessee. 5. It was the appellant's case before the authorities that in terms of Section 14A of the Act, before Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules 1961 (Rules) can be applied to disallow expenditure incurred to earn exempt income, the Assessing Officer in terms of Section 14A(2) of the Act must record his non satisfaction with the claim of disallowance, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ;s reliance upon the decision of the Tribunal in J.K. Investors (supra) while dismissing the appellant-assessee's appeal before it. In fact the impugned order of the Tribunal ought to have dealt with its decision in J. K. Investors (supra) and considered its applicability to the present facts. 7. In view of the fact that the impugned order of the Tribunal does not deal with its decision in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
