9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in C.I.T.-II, Ahmedabad, Gujarat vs. M/s. Mastek Ltd [2013 (3) TMI 309 - SUPREME COURT] while considering whether or not the two questions of law which the petitioner intends to press for consideration by the High Court need to be framed at the time of hearing of the appeal - The observations made by the High Court in the impugned order do not survive – Decided in favour of Petitioner. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re afraid that the Revenue is under some mis-conception. The proviso following the main provision of Section 260A(4) of the Act states that nothing stated in sub-section (4), i.e., 'The appeal shall be heard only on the question so formulated' shall be deemed to take away or abridge the power of the Court to hear, for reasons to be recorded, the appeal on any other substantial question of law not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the High Court. He submits that if those two questions of law, in light of the order dated 4.3.2013 of this Court in Mastek Ltd. (supra), are considered by the High court at the time of hearing of the income tax appeal, he does not have much to say. 3. The two questions, which are being pressed by the petitioner for consideration by the High Court in ITA No. 1056 of 2011, are as follows: A. Whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntire income including foreign exchange fluctuation gain had been derived and consequently the foreign exchange fluctuation gain arising on external commercial borrowings for meeting working capital requirements is income from business and eligible for relief under Section 10A of the Act? 4. Mr. Gourab Banerji, learned Additional Solicitor General for the Revenue has no objection if the grievance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
