9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 337X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of reopening as also in regard to granting of the assessee opportunity to recompute the deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act, if the reopening was held against the assessee - The issue was restored for fresh adjudication. - ITA No.1043/Kol/2008 - - - Dated:- 16-12-2013 - Sri Shamim Yahya, AM And Sri George Mathan, JM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate For the Respondent : Shri Varinder Mehta, CIT (DR) ORDER Per Shri George Mathan, JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of ld. C.I.T.(A)- XII, Kolkata in Appeal No.20/XII/AC-12/05-06 dated 14.02.2008 for Assessment year 1997-98. 2. Shri R.N.Bajoria, Sr.Advocate represented on behalf of the assessee and Shri Varinder Mehta, CIT(DR) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... poses of deduction under section 80HHC of the Act at Rs.8,683,246 instead of providing the basis for computing the same at Rs.3,668,915. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)erred in not appreciating the fact that the appellant's claim for deduction under section 80HHC of the Act is based on the certificate issued by a renowned firm of Chartered Accountants viz. Price Waterhouse, Chartered Accountants. 4(a) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A)erred in upholding the action of the AO whereby the AO has considered the total employment cost, traveling expenses, rent and miscellaneous expenses as per the audited accounts as indirect cost and worked out the prorated indirect cost of trad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d against the assessee, then the restoring the issue of the computation of deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act to the file of the AO for re-adjudication. The ld. Counsel drew our attention to page 96 of the paper book which was the copy of the reasons recorded. It was the submission that the AO has referred to a figure of Rs.36,68,915/- in the reasons which the AO has been unable to reconcile. It was the submission that even though the appeal has been heard for a number of times the Revenue has been unable to explain this figure of Rs.36,68,915/-. It was the further submission that even though the issue of reopening was raised before the ld. CIT(A) the ld. CIT(A) in his order at page-3 has without giving any reasons adjudicated the issue in a ve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
