9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 1705X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the above question, we do not think we should entertain it. There is a difference and vast as it is, between an order being subjected to challenge and the challenge having succeeded. In the later case, the order is wiped out because then it is quashed and set aside. Today, a challenge is merely pending. That cannot be equated to the challenge succeeding. That hurdle is yet to be crossed. If that is not crossed, the initial order of restoration of registration continues to bind the Revenue. As a result of the above discussion, we do not find that the questions proposed are substantial questions of law - Income Tax Appeal No. 228 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 25-9-2017 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And Prakash D. Naik, JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 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 2006-2007, 2007-2008 and 2008-2009, 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 order. 7. Aggrieved by that and by cancellation of registration, the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the assessee was held to be entitled to the benefit of exemption u/s 11 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the reasons given in the A.Ys.2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 when such finding of the Hon'ble Tribunal has already been appealed against before this Hon'ble Court? 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 question no.(ii) is a substantial question 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 in the facts and circumstances of the present case and from the order of the Tribunal? Merely because the Revenue has ch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
