CIT Vs. PURSARTH TRADING CO. (P) LTD.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN this appeal by the Revenue for assessment year 2006 -07, although two questions have been proposed for our consideration, since question No. (ii) does not arise from the order of the Tribunal, only question (i) is being pressed by the Revenue, which reads thus:

(2.) ON further appeal, the Tribunal by the impugned order has allowed the claim of the respondent -assessee to set off its long term capital loss in terms of Section 74 of the Act by following its decision in the matter of Manali Investments v. Asstt. CIT : (2011) 45 SOT 128 (URO) (Mum). The Revenue has preferred an appeal against the order of the Tribunal in the matter of Manali Investments (supra) to this Court in appeal, being Income Tax Appeal No. 1658 of 2012. By our order passed today i.e. 13th March, 2013, we have refused to entertain Income Tax Appeal No. 1658 of 2012. For the reasons indicated in our order passed today i.e. 13th March, 2013 in Income Tax Appeal No. 1658 of 2012 filed by the Revenue in respect of Manali Investments, we see no reason to entertain the proposed reframed question of law. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs.