9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1549X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ise was merely done on account of incorporating the trial balance appearing in the Iraqi branch in the Head Officer books in Indian currency. Since no actual gain accrued to the assessee, there was no question of taxing this amount. - Decided against revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 111 of 2008 - - - Dated:- 30-3-2017 - Sudhir Agarwal And Ravindra Nath MishraII, JJ. Counsel for Appellant : D. D. Chopra, Alok Mathur Counsel for Respondent : Namit Sharma ORDER 1. Heard Sri Alok Mathur, for appellant and Sri Namit Sharma, Advocate, for respondents. 2. This appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act, 1961 ) has been filed challenging the judgment and order dated 31.12.2007 pas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in dismissing the departmental appeal in respect of addition of ₹ 79,58,63,603.00 lacs made on account of retention money without appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on records. (v) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in dismissing the appeal of the department in respect of disallowance of ₹ 25,27,000/on account of share issue expenses debited in P L account, contrary to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of PIDC Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in 225 ITR 972. 4. So far as question(i) is concerned, we find that there is a finding of fact recorded by Tribunal after noticing that Assessi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or contrary to record, we answer Question(i) against Revenue. 6. So far as Questions(ii) and (iv)are concerned, it is purely a question of fact and do not give rise to any substantial question of law, hence need not be answered. 7. So far as Question(iii) is concerned, counsel for parties states that it is squarely covered by judgment of this Court dated 24.01.2017 passed in Income Tax Appeal No. 87 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/S Jai Prakash Industries Pvt. Ltd.) wherein similar question was answered against Revenue and in favour of Assessee. 8. For the reasons stated in our judgment dated 24.1.2017 passed in Income Tax Appeal No. 87 of 2008 (supra) Question(iii) is also answered against Revenue. 9. In respect o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
