9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (3) TMI 849X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the Applicant : Shri F.B. Andhyarujina For the Respondent : Shri A.K. Kardam ORDER Per RAJENDRA SINGH (AM) This miscellaneous application has been filed by the assessee requesting for recall of the order dated 17.4.2008 of the Tribunal in ITA No.4309/Mum/2005 for assessment year 2001-02. The assessee has requested to recall the order for fresh adjudication on the ground o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d that in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Programme for Community Organisation (248 ITR 1), the assessee was entitled to carry forward 25% of gross income before set off of expenses. The assessee also referred to several other judgments in this regard including the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case in assessment year 2005-06. The Tribunal however ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It was pointed out that though the Tribunal had considered the Supreme Court judgment as well as judgments of High Courts cited by the assessee at the time of hearing of the appeal, the Tribunal had omitted to consider its decision in assessee s own case in 1995-96 (supra) which had also been referred. It was further submitted that non-consideration of decision of coordinate bench of the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee had filed appeal before the Tribunal. Assessee had placed reliance on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Programme for Community Organisation (supra), and several other judgments of High Courts. The Tribunal distinguished these judgments and confirmed the orders of authorities below disallowing the claim of the assessee. The ld. AR has pointed out that the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
