U.P. FOREST CORPORATION Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1
LAWS(ALL)-2015-8-245
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on August 26,2015

U.P. Forest Corporation Appellant
VERSUS
Commissioner Of Income Tax -1 Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) The above five appeals have been filed by the Assessee U.P. Forest Corporation, 21/475, Indira Nagar, Lucknow under Sec. 260A of Income -tax Act, 1961 against the common judgment & order dated 27.8.2013, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow in five Income Tax Appeals i.e. I.T.A. No. 258/Luc/2012 to I.T.A. No. 262, Lucknow/2012, U.P. Forest Corpn. v/s. CIT Ayakar Bhawan, Lucknow whereby the learned Tribunal has dismissed the said appeals arising out of five separate orders, passed on 16.3.2012 by the Commissioner of Income -tax in exercise of powers conferred on him vide Sec. 263 of the Income -tax Act, 1961 whereby Commissioner has set aside assessment orders passed for the years 1990 -91, 1991 -92, 1992 -93, 1993 -94 and 1994 -95 and remanded the case to make fresh assessment in terms of the remand order dated 30.1.2009, passed by the Tribunal in appeal for relevant years. Since the substantial questions of law raised in all the appeals are the same and the parties are also the same, the above appeals are being decided by a common judgment.
(2.) Parties have filed their Written Statements which have been taken on record. In all the above appeals following substantial questions of law have been raised by the Appellant -Assessee for determination: "(I) Whether the Tribunal has committed substantial illegality by not considering ratio of the cases referred by the appellant during the course of hearing as mentioned in paras 39 and 40 of present appeal? (II) Whether under the facts and circumstances of the case Income -tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding order dated 16.3.2012, passed under Sec. 263 of the Income -tax Act in setting aside the order of the Assessing Authority dated 29.12.2009 which was admittedly apropos direction of the Tribunal under Sec. 254 of the Act, that too, without recording any finding on merit -
(3.) We have heard Sri Ashish Raj Shukla and Sri R.B. Shukla, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Sri Alok Mathur, learned counsel for the respondents.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.