2013 (10) TMI 659

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... mitted for hearing vide order dated 1st November, 2001 on the following substantial questions of law:- "A. Whether ITAT was correct in law in confirming the order of CIT(A) and thereby deleting the addition of Rs.4,47,052/- at the rate of 45% of salary on account of overhead and the addition of Rs.28,704/- made under the head other perquisites by the Assessing Officer? B. Whether the order of IT .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dent had claimed that he was a resident but not an ordinary resident during the year under consideration and a letter dated 22nd March, 1993 along with other details were filed by the respondent- assessee. The assessment order mentions that salary payments were made in pounds and the income was shown in pounds, in the return, seized printouts and the settlement application. It records overtime, li .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... x effect. Subsequently, applications for review were filed but they have been dismissed vide order dated 23rd August, 2013 after recording that the issue was covered by ITA No. 397/2007, Commissioner of Income Tax XVI versus Sashi Mukundan and other connected matters decided on 31st July, 2013. The impugned order of the tribunal in the present appeal also dismisses appeals of the Revenue in the ca .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X