Itxa/1412/2014 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I,Kolhapur v. Shri. Paras Bhomraj Oswal

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1185 OF 2014 ALONG WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NOS. 1186/2014, 1332/2014, 1412/2014 AND 1419/2014 Commissioner of Income Tax-I,Kolhpapur v/s. Shri Paras Bhomraj Oswal .. Appellant .. Respondent Mr. N.M. Singh for the appellant None for the respondent CORAM : M.S. SANKLECHA & A.K. MENON, J.J. DATED : 9[th] JANUARY, 2017. P.C. 1.These Appeals under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenge the common impugned order dated 29[th] November, 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The common impugned order is in respect of Assessment Years 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2009-10. 2.The only question urged by Mr. Singh before us for consideration is as under :- “Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in restoring the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for computation of the deduction under Section 80IB for calculation of built up area of Varandha in respect of 19 bunglows; when it was evident that the built up area of the residential area of 19 bunglows are exceeding 1500 square feet of built up area; thereby flouting Rule 79 of the Bye-Laws of the Kolhapur Municipal Corporation? 3.Mr. Singh, learned Counsel appearing for the Revenue states that the issue be restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration. 4.We find that the impugned order of the Tribunal has at paragraph 3.1 and 3.2 restored the issue to the Assessing Officer. In the above view, we are unable to understand the grievance of the Revenue to the impugned order. Save the above submission, no other submission in support of the appeal is made. In view of the above, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. 5.Accordingly, all the appeals are dismissed. No order as to costs. (A.K. MENON, J.) (M.S. SANKLECHA, J.)