9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 1288X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal in KBII Securities Pvt. Ltd. (2012 (7) TMI 930 - ITAT MUMBAI) which has been merely followed by the impugned order as well as the Revenue accepting an identical basis adopted in the earlier Assessment Year, coupled with the fact that even before us the Revenue is unable to point out to why and how the method of allocation of expenses made by the respondent-assessee is incorrect and/or bad.- Decided against revenue - Income Tax Appeal No. 2074 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 23-11-2015 - M. S. Sanklecha And G. S. Kulkarni, JJ. For the Appellants : Mr Suresh Kumar i/b Ms Padma Divakar For the Respondent : Ms Asifa Khan ORDER P. C. 1. This appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act,1961 (the Act) filed by the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue was dismissed on 27 October 2015 by this Court. This by following the decision of this Court in Godrej Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. (supra). (c) Thus, question Nos.1 and 2 as proposed do not give rise to any substantial question of law. Accordingly, not entertained. 4. Regarding Question 3: (a) The respondent-assessee had in its return of income claimed rebate under Section 88E of the Act of ₹ 3.33 crores. Section 88E of the Act provides for rebate in respect of income earned on transactions on which securities transaction tax had been paid. The Assessing Officer did not accept the same and restricted the rebate to an amount of ₹ 3.37 crores. This restriction of rebate on account of not accepting allocation of expenses a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... has preferred any appeal from the order of the Tribunal in KBII Securities Pvt. Ltd. (supra). Mr. Suresh Kumar, learned Counsel for the Revenue is unable to make any statement with regard to whether the appeal has been filed or not. However, Ms.Khan states that according to her instructions no appeal has been filed in the case of the order dated 18 July 2012 passed in respect of the sister concern. In any view of the matter, the Revenue does not dispute the fact that for the Assessment year 200607 the claim under Section 88E made by the respondent-assessee was on the similar basis as adopted in the subject Assessment Year and the claim was accepted by the Revenue. In view of the decision of the Tribunal in KBII Securities Pvt. Ltd. (supra) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
