9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 800X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of this objection in terms of this Circular is not enough. The Revenue will have to point out that this audit objection has been accepted by the Department. We have no such record before us. In the circumstances, we find that this is an attempt to get over the binding Circulars and in any case we shall not allow the Revenue to get over them in this manner. The Circulars continue to bind the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of law. These questions are proposed on page 5 of the paper-book {questions 6.1 to 6.3}. 2. He would submit that such questions are already admitted by this Court and in that regard he would refer to an order passed by this Court in Income Tax Appeal No.254 of 2013. That Income Tax Appeal No.254 of 2013 has been erroneously withdrawn. 3. A notice of motion (No.531 of 2018) has been filed in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submission. 5. We note a basic fallacy in this submission. Firstly, this Court has not restored Income Tax Appeal No.254 of 2013 to its file. It is only a request to restore that appeal which is pending but that will be subject to the orders of this Court. Secondly, though the tax effect in terms of the CBDT Circular No.21 of 2015, dated 10122015, is ₹ 20,00,000/, now there is Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s/bank accounts. 7. Mr. Pinto would submit that this is a conditional withdrawal permitted. The Revenue's Circular, therefore, cannot be read de hors or by omitting this condition. One of the conditions in Clause 10(c) of this Circular is, where the Revenue Audit Objection in the case has been accepted by the Department. 8. It is conceded that while seeking to restore Income Tax Appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
