9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enditure u/s 37(1) - Held that:- AO deleting a sum of 39.79 lacs being part of the project development expenses, considering as a capital expenditure against the assessee's claim of the expenditure being revenue in nature. We notice that identical question had come up for consideration before the Tribunal in case of this very assessee for earlier assessment year 2008-09. Tribunal had held the issu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sing following questions for our consideration:- "(i) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 39,79,354/- of Project Development Expenses made by the Assessing Officer considering it as Capital Expenditure against the Assessee's claim to be considered it as Revenue Expenditure u/S 37(1) of the In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had come up for consideration before the Tribunal in case of this very assessee for earlier assessment year 2008-09. The Tribunal had held the issue in favour of the assessee. In the present impugned judgment also, the Tribunal has relied on the same order. We note that the Revenue had carried the matter in appeal before the High Court by filing Income Tax Appeal No. 892 of 2014 (CIT-4 Vs. M/s. R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
