Itta/249/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Iv v. New Bombay Goods Transport

THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI I.T.T.A.No.249 of 2013 DATED: 11.7.2013 Between: The Commissioner of Income Tax (IV), Hyderabad. … Appellant And New Bombay Goods Transport,Hyderabad. …. Respondent THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE Ms. JUSTICE G. ROHINI I.T.T.A.No.249 OF 2013 Judgment:(per the Hon’ble the Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) We have heard the learned counsel for the appellant andwe have perused the impugned judgment and order of thelearned Tribunal. It appears, the learned Tribunal has remanded the matterwith the observation as follows: “Considering the fact that neither the AO nor theCIT(A) had the benefit of the decision of Special Benchwhen orders were passed by them and alsoconsidering the contentions of the learned AR that thehire charges were paid during the relevant previousyear, we think it proper to restore the matter back tothe file of the AO with a direction to examine as towhether hire charges debited to Profit & Loss A/c haveactually been paid during relevant previous year. If theAO finds that the amount has actually been paid duringthe relevant previous year, then no disallowance couldbe made in view of Special Bench decision.” Simply, it is an order of remand and nothing has beendecided by the Tribunal. Hence, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. No costs. ___________________ K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ _________________ G. ROHINI, J 11.07.2013 pnb