9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts hotel business, which was the main object, for which, the assessee company was incorporated. Since the impugned order passed by the Tribunal did not give any independent reasons for allowing the assessee's appeal to follow the earlier decision in the assessee's own case, which order now stands confirmed because the appeal filed by the Revenue before this Court having been withdrawn on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y/2018 on the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chennai D Bench for the assessment year 2013-14. 2. We have heard Mr.J.Narayanasamy, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant Revenue. Though the respondent has been served and the name of the respondent printed in the cause list, none appears for the respondent. 3. The appeal has been filed by the Revenue by rai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... licable to the present assessment year 2013-14 ? 4. The Tribunal, while allowing the assessee's appeal by the impugned order, relied upon the order of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case in ITA.No.1242/Chny/2017 dated 27.8.2018 and extracted the said order in the impugned order in paragraph 6. The Revenue preferred an appeal before this Court challenging the said order of the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of K.Sampath Kumar Vs. CIT [reported in 158 ITR 25]. It has been further stated that the factual position needed to be considered, as the assessee company, though was incorporated on 17.2.2006, till the financial year 2010-11, did not enter into its hotel business, which was the main object, for which, the assessee company was incorporated. Since the impugned order passed by the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
