9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 349X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no finding on merit has been arrived at by the Tribunal and it is only an 'open remand'. It is quite possible for the Revenue to raise all the relevant contentions including the 'question of law', if any, before the AO, even with reference to Section 35D. No prejudice is caused in any manner. That apart, in so far as no finding has been rendered by the Tribunal as to the applicability of Section 35D it cannot be said that the appeal involves any 'substantial question of law' so as to call for interference of this Court in exercise of the power under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act. - ITA. No. 1099 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 13-3-2019 - MR P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON AND MR N. ANIL KUMAR, JJ. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcumstances of the case, the ITAT is right in law in allowing depreciation on an imaginary amount based on the fluctuation of foreign currency without having an actual payment and is not the direction/decision against the provisions of the Income tax Act? ( c) Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in the light of the wording for making the payment towards the whole or part of the cost of the asset obtained in Sec.43A is not the order of the Tribunal against law. 2. Heard Sri.Christopher Abraham, the learned Standing Counsel for the appellant as well as Sri.Joseph Markos, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the respondent/assessee. 3. The sequence of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... osition, there cannot be any further dispute in this regard and the surviving issue is only with regard to the one with reference to Section 35D of the Income Tax Act. 5. The assessee had shown the disputed amount as part of the revenue expenses, which was not accepted by the assessing officer in Annexure-A order, holding that it had to be treated as of capital in nature and assessed the tax accordingly. The finding and reasoning given by the Assessing Officer was upheld by the Commissioner of Appeals vide Annexure-B order and this made the assessee to have it challenged by way of further appeal before the Tribunal. The matter was considered and the proper course to have it shown as capital in nature was affirmed by the Trib ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
