9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 195X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sional jurisdiction ought not to have been exercised by the CIT(A). Only because the Commissioner thought that other view is a better view, would not enable Commissioner of Income Tax to exercise power under Section 263 of the Act. It would not be a reopening of assessment or reassessment. We are not inclined to entertain the present appeal. It is made clear that we have not given any finding in regard to the applicability of Section 35D vis-a-vis the assessee so also have not considered the observations of the Tribunal with regard to exercise of revisional powers only on his own accord and not an application by the Assessing Officer. - Decided against revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No. 599 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 1-8-2017 - S. V. Gangap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he judgment of this Court in a case of the Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Emirates Commercial Bank Ltd. 262 ITR 55 wherein this Court has held that the banks are industrial undertakings and eligible for deductions under Section 32A. According to the learned Counsel, the CIT(A) could not have exercised revisional jurisdiction even if it came to the conclusion that there are two possible views. The learned Counsel relies on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Malabar Industrial Co. Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 243 ITR 81 and another judgment of the Apex Court in a case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Max India Ltd., reported in (2007) 295 ITR 282. 4. We have considered the submissions. The Tribunal has considered the de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Bombay High Court, which is also the jurisdictional High Court, has held that Banks are industrial undertakings and eligible for deduction under section 32A of the Act. HSBC Securities and Capital Markets (India) Pvt. Ltd. (1384/M/2000) where the Hon'ble Mumbai ITAT has held that even a share broking entity is an industrial undertaking for the purpose of section 35D. Therefore, the claim of assessee for deduction under section 35D is in accordance with law and is allowable. 5. It appears that the Assessing Officer sought clarification from the assessee about the correctness of the amount of onefifth of the total expenses incurred under Section 35D of the Act. The assessee under letter dated 26.10.2004 gave specifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
