9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1703X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d be interfered with, has not been clarified. The only argument is, namely, if the Revenue succeeds in the Appeal challenging the order of the Tribunal restoring assessee's registration, then it may be open for the Revenue to tax its income and by holding that both Sections 11 and 12 of the IT Act have no application thereto. We do not think that such ifs and buts would permit the Revenue to get over a presently binding order of the Tribunal. That order of restoration of registration binds the Revenue. That order has not been quashed and set aside by this Court. The Appeal is merely admitted. To our mind, the question as proposed in the present matter is not a substantial question of law. - Income Tax Appeal No. 292 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ation of the trust has been cancelled by the commissioner of Income Tax, Pune under Section 12AA(3) by order dated 8th November, 2007. Since the registration has been cancelled, the Assessing Officer was of the opinion that the assessee is to be treated like any other assessee and cannot take assistance of the above two legal provisions. Relying upon his findings for the assessment years 20062007 to 2009-2010, the assessment was finalized treating the assessee as an Association Of Persons. 5. A showcause notice was issued by the Assessing Officer calling upon the assessee why its income should not be brought to tax in the above terms. 6. The Assessing Officer, on receipt of an explanation, was not satisfied and proceeded to pass his o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s held to be entitled to benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 when the issue was taken to ITAT? (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in not adjudicating the ground raised against the apportionment of the development fees allowed by the Ld. CIT(A) in an arbitrary manner? 11. It is conceded that unless the Revenue gets over the difficulty it faces insofar as question no.(i) as is reproduced is concerned, there is no occasion for it to argue that the other two questions are substantial questions of law. We repeatedly asked Mr. Walve as to how the Revenue has framed and proposed the above question no.(i), how does it arise ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
