9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 716X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f benefit of the first year, the benefit cannot be disallowed in subsequent Assessment years. Therefore no fault can be found with the impugned order. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Income Tax Appeal No. 1731 of 2013, Income Tax Appeal No. 1735 of 2013, Income Tax Appeal No. 1974 of 2013 -(Not on Board ) - - - Dated:- 10-8-2015 - M. S. Sanklecha And N. M. Jamdar, JJ. For the Appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #39;s case for AY 2002-03 without appreciating that the facts of AY 2002-03 are completely distinguishable from the facts of AY 2004-05, AY 2006-07 and AY 2008-09 and therefore the ratio of the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v/s M/s Western Outdoor Interactive Pvt Ltd 349 ITR 309 (Bom) relied upon by the ITAT is not applicable to the case of the assessee? 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nue accepted the verdict of the Tribunal and did not carry the issue in further appeal to this Court. 5. For the subsequent Assessment years including the Assessment years 2004-2005, 2006-2007 and 2008-2009 the Tribunal by the impugned order held that when the deduction was allowed in the first year of its claim i.e. 2002-2003 under section 10A of the Act and the Revenue has accepted the same, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -2003 from the order of the Tribunal in view of low tax effect. In the above view, he submits that the decision of this Court in CIT v/s Western Outdoor would not apply. Mr.Gopal, learned counsel appearing for the Respondent submits a copy of the order of the Tribunal dated 21/09/2012 passed on the Revenue's Miscellaneous Application with regard to the order dated 22/5/2009 passed by the Tribu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ue. Thus it must follow that the Revenue has accepted the order of the Tribunal for the A.Y. 2002-2003 in respect of claim under Section 10A of the Act. 8. We find that the impugned order has merely followed the order of this Court in Western Outdoor and Paul Brothers in holding that in the absence of withdrawal of benefit of the first year, the benefit cannot be disallowed in subsequent Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
