9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (10) TMI 925X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Petitioner Mr. P.C. Chhotaray for the Respondent ORDER P.C.: 1. This review petition is filed by the original respondent -assessee requesting us to review / recall our judgment dated 22.2.2019 passed in Income Tax Appeal No. 51 of 2016. By the said judgment, we had allowed the Revenue's appeal. The question of law considered by the Court was as under:- "Whether on the facts and in the ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re the Assessing Officer that M.P. Gupta, the present assessee had imported almond by using the licence and that redemption fine of Rs. 75 lacs paid to the Madras Custom House was done by M.P. Gupta. All transactions were made by him and he was responsible for the fine. He stated clearly that as per the agreement, M/s. Rajnikant Brothers were only entitled to the service charges. Thus, there was a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Section 69C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act" for short). It was at the appellate stage that the assessee had taken an alternative contention that in any case the expenditure would be allowable under Section 37 of the Act. The evidence necessary to examine this alternative contention was on record. However, the Tribunal had not carried out proper fact finding inquiries and therefore, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
