9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1790X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iew that the assessee company had departed from the basic agricultural operations and had indulged in production of parent seeds - HELD THAT:- We find merit in the submissions of the ld. AR. From the facts of the case, it is apparent that the Tribunal [ 2019 (2) TMI 49 - ITAT HYDERABAD] had quashed the order of the Pr. CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act. Therefore, the order passed by the Ld. AO U/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... raised two grounds in its appeal however, the crux of the issue is that "the Ld. CIT (A) has erred by allowing the appeal of the assessee by holding that the order of the Ld. AO U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 263 of the Act does not survive as the Tribunal had quashed the order passed by the Ld. Pr. CIT U/s. 263 of the Act." 3. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. Pr. CIT on perusal of the Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed 23/10/2017 and restored the order of the Ld. AO dated 30/3/2015 because the Tribunal vide its order in ITA No. 667/Hyd/2017, dated 30/1/2019 had set-aside the order of the Ld. Pr. CIT passed U/s. 263 of the Act. It was therefore argued the appeal of the Revenue does not survive. The Ld. DR could not controvert to the submissions of the Ld. AR. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and careful ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
