9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 1750X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined by the Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co.Ltd. v. CIT (2000 (2) TMI 10 - SUPREME Court) as followed in CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd. (2010 (7) TMI 38 - HIGH COURT OF DELHI) the view taken by the AO in the present appeal is a possible one and there was no occasion for the CIT to have exercised jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act. The impugned order of the ITAT therefore does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he CIT by the said order concluded that the order dated 29th September 2009 passed by the Assessing Officer ('AO') allowing deduction under Sections 36(1) (viia) (c) and 36 (1) (viii) of the Act in favour of the Assessee was erroneous as well as prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. 4. The ITAT in the impugned order noticed on the question whether the total income for the purposes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... possible interpretations. 6. The Court is satisfied that in terms of the law explained by the Supreme Court in Malabar Industrial Co.Ltd. v. CIT 243 ITR 83 (SC) as followed by this Court in its recent decision dated 5th July 2010 in ITA No. 1376 of2009 (CIT v. Honda Siel Power Products Ltd.) the view taken by the AO in the present appeal is a possible one and there was no occasion for the CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
