2017 (8) TMI 609

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tioner on notice, afford an opportunity and then take decision in the matter. However, the respondent has straight away proceeded and passed the impugned order, which is not sustainable, as it is in violation of principles of natural justice. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that there is an order of the Tribunal, which has been extracted and the extracted portion is not f .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... he respondent held that expenses towards the issue of improvement in leasehold premises to the tune of ₹ 2,75,29,667/- for the assessment year 2009-2010 is treated as capital in nature as against the claim of the assessee as revenue expenditure and the income of the assessee company for the assessment year 2009-2010 remains unaltered from giving effect order dated 20.05.2016. The petitioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... r assessment year 2008-09. Appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose. 4. Pursuant to the above order, the appropriate procedure that should have been followed by the respondent is to put the petitioner on notice, afford an opportunity and then take decision in the matter. However, the respondent has straight away proceeded and passed the impugned order, which is not .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X