9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (10) TMI 1030X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cs and therefore there is no justification for the AO to make the addition u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act as no disallowance is required to be made on this count. Case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decisions in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014 (8) TMI 119 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) and Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd (2009 (1) TMI 4 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT). - Decided in favour of assessee. - M.A. 0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l is an apparent mistake in the order, therefore, the same should be rectified or recalled. 3. On the other hand the ld. AR fairly conceded the contentions put forth by the ld. DR that G-2 and G-3 were not adjudicated while deciding the above appeal and therefore, same is required to be rectified.The ld. AR however, submitted that the common issue involved in the said Grounds is a covered one a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oyees were only to the tune of ₹ 57,50,477/- and the remaining advances were to the extent of ₹ 3.09 crores were to the suppliers of services or on account of advance tax , central excise etc. The ld. AR therefore submitted that since assessee s own funds were far more than the money advanced to the staff which was ₹ 57,50,477/- ,therefore, the Ground raised by the revenue should ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the decisions in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014)(366 ITR 505) (Bom HC) and Reliance Utilities Power Ltd (2009)(313 ITR 340)(Bom HC). 6. We therefore, respectfully following ratio laid by the jurisdictional high court in the above decisions decide the Ground No.2 and 3 against the revenue and accordingly the MA is decided and disposed off as stated herein above and order of the Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
