9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (6) TMI 889X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , Jr. Standing Counsel For the Cross-objector : Shri N. Devanathan, Advocate & Shri A.Raja, CA ORDER Per Dr. O. K. Narayanan, Vice-President The appeal is filed by the Revenue. The cross objection is filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2002-03. The appeal is directed against the order passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-III, at Chennai dated 6.10.2010 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ich are not eligible for the benefit of sec.80IB. The assessee has debited all the R & D expenditure to its existing units whereas the Assessing Officer has attributed the expenditure to the manufacturing unit at Pondicherry which is the eligible unit for relief under sec.80IB. As pointed out by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the R & D was functioning since 1994 and the assessee has alr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... second ground raised by the Revenue is that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 91,44,127/- under sec.40A(2)(a) & (b) of the Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has carefully considered this issue in paragraph 6.2 of his order. Even though the profits of the associate firms may be higher, the Assessing Officer has not brought on rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mmissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has erred in not deleting the disallowance made by the assessing authority in respect of provision of ₹ 93,815/- made for leave encashment as per existing statutory requirement as held by Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. And Another v. Union O India And Others (292 ITR 470). On merit, this issue is covered in favour of the assessee b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
