9911796707
TMI Blog2006 (11) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act" for short), for the opinion of this court on the following question, which arises out of I.T. Appeal No. 121/Ahd/1991 pertaining to the assessment year 1989-90: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that the officer was not justified in disallowing deduction claimed by way of adjust ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted out of the total income, but, the deduction from the incentive bonus remained untouched. The assessee, being aggrieved by the said order, filed an appeal to the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and submitted that to the extent of 40 per cent., the Assessing Officer should have allowed the application. The contention of the assessee before the Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax (Appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in accordance with the judgment of this court, deduction to the extent of 30 per cent. only could be allowed and not beyond that. His submission is that the Tribunal could not make an absolute order in favour of the assessee. Section 143(1)(a) of the Act says that where a return has been made under section 139, or in response to a notice under sub-section (1) of section 142, then, particular po ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Tribunals or of the High Courts, but, the question would be that whether the Assessing Officer was justified in proceeding under section 143(1)(a), especially, when the matter was debatable and the Assessing Officer could proceed either under section 143(2) or section 143(3) of the Act. The apex court, in the matter of T.S. Balaram, ITO v. Volkart Brothers [1971] 82 ITR 50, has observed that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
