9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nsidering the reply. Therefore, the CIT order u/s 263 on this issue is tantamount to change of opinion which is not permitted under the law as held by the various high courts on this issue - in favour of assessee. Foreign currency loan, liability and assets (other than fixed assets) were restated at the rate of prevailing at the year end and exchange rate difference was charged to the profit an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shodhan ORDER This is the assessee's appeal emanating from the order of Ld. CIT-I, Baroda dated 31-03-2009 u/s 263 of the I.T. Act. The Ld. AO scrutinized the case u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act and completed the assessment on 31-10- I.T.A. No.1776/Ahd/2009 A.Y. 2004-05 2006 wherein the gross additions were made at Rs. 3,53,94,191/- and revised loss calculated at Rs. 2,59,31,768/- against retur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3 B of I.T. Act. The ld. A.R. argued that full amount had been added back in computation of income by the assessee. The Ld. CIT-DR fairly accepted the facts. We have verified the fact and this interest has already been added back by the appellant in computation of income. Thus, to that extent this order of the AO is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of justice. 3. The ld. CIT observe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filed reply. Therefore, the CIT order u/s 263 on this issue is tantamount to change of opinion which is not permitted under the law as held by the various high courts on this issue. 5. Ground No. 4 is directing to the A.O. that Rs. 6,38,91,300/- being retention amount billed but not due had not accounted by the assessee which has been accepted by the Commissioner of Income-tax by passing the rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as objected that no specific inquiry was made by the A.O. Thus to that extent, the order of the A.O. is prejudicial and erroneous to the interest of Revenue. Ld. counsel for the assessee argued that this fluctuation of exchange loss is allowable being a revenue expenditure relied in the case of Woodward Governor Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 312 ITR 254(SC) and details were also given before the AO, therefore ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
