9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1685X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the issue of earning exempt income as a share of partnership firm M/s. Sun Pharmaceutical Industries - non applicability of section 37 - HELD THAT:- The assessee had claimed certain expenditure which the Assessing Officer had disallowed holding that the same was not for the purpose of business. CIT (A) gave partial relief but made disallowance under section 14A of the Act. In further appeals by the Revenue as well as by the assessee, the Tribunal uphold applicability of section 14A of the Act but provided that Rule 8D formally may be applied. In that view of the matter, this question does not arise at the hands of the Revenue. We make it clear that we have already admitted Revenue's contention regarding non-applicability of section 37 o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ho would dispose of the proceedings once the judgement of the Supreme Court in the Revenue's appeal against such judgement of Calcutta High Court is rendered. This question is disposed of accordingly. - R/TAX APPEAL NO. 318 of 2018 - - - Dated:- 23-4-2018 - MR. JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI AND MR. JUSTICE B.N. KARIA For the Appellant : MR.G.C.SRIVASTAVA with MR VARUN K.PATEL(3802) For the Respondent : MR S N SOPARKAR, SR ADV WITH MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) 1. Tax Appeal is admitted for consideration of following substantial questions of law: A. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in setting aside the findings of the CIT ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ted Arm's Length Price in accordance with the provision of section 92C of the Act? E. Whether in the facts of the case and in law, the ITAT has erred in passing the order by ignoring and omitting to pass any order of admission or rejection of the three applications made by the Revenue under Rule 29 of the ITA Rules urging the Tribunal to admit additional pieces of evidence which were very crucial to the issue and thereby passing the order on an incomplete set of facts? F. Whether in facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in upholding the assessee's claim for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act in relation to the expenditure for registration of Foreign Trade Marks and P ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are not separately framed and are not being discussed in this order. 3. The independent questions which we noticed but which we are not inclined for one reason or the other read as under: (1) Whether in facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in upholding the assessee's claim for weighted deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act, in relation to the expenditure incurred on Corporate Advertisement? (2) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ITAT was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to calculate amount of disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act as per Rule 8D on administrative expenses only on the issue of earning exempt income as a share of partnership ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vision for leave encashment. The Revenue contends that in view of section 43B of the Act, such provision would not be allowable deduction. The assessee relies on the judgement of Calcutta High Court in case of Exide Industries Ltd and another v. Union of India and others reported in 292 ITR 470. The Tribunal, by the impugned judgement, noted that the SLP against such judgement is pending before the Supreme Court and therefore placed the issue before the Assessing Officer and directed the Assessing Officer to decide the same on the basis of outcome of such proceedings before the Supreme Court. Counsel for the Revenue brought to our notice, the amended provision of sub-section (6) of section 153 of the Act which provides for a time limit of 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
