9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (9) TMI 1140X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order will dispose of ITA Nos. 466 and 467 of 2010 as common questions are involved. 2. ITA No. 466 of 2010 has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, "the Act") against the order dated 26.11.2009 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar in I.T.A. No.429(ASR)/2009 for the assessment year 2003-04 proposing to raise following substantial quest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the fact that the entire amount represents the profit in the hands of assessee? IV. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in deducting the face value of DEPB from sale price of DEPB for calculating profit under Sections 28(iiid) and 28(iiie) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as if the face value is the cost incurred by the assessee to acquire the DEPB? V ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by orders of this Court dated 16.8.2010 in I.T.A. No.301 of 2010 CIT v. M/s Victor Forgings and I.T.A. No.299 of 2010 CIT v. F.C. Sondhi, wherein after noticing the judgment of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Kalpataru Colours & Chemicals 2010 (42) DTR 193, the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law. 4. Since we find that the matter is covered by earlier or ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
