1979 (1) TMI 122

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... 2. The assessee claimed weighted deduction in respect of the amount of Rs. 1,25,106 under s. 35B, as represented by the following items of expenditure: (i) Commission paid to foreign agents Rs. 80,520 (ii) Bank charges Rs. 22,755 (iii) Foreign travelling expenses of Partners. Rs. 1,831 (iv) Postages and cable charges. R .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... C partly upheld the ITO's orders under s. 154. 3. It was argued before us that the applicability of s. 35B(1)(b) would raise debatable issues and that it could not be said that the ITO made any palpable or obvious error in granting the assessee's claim while framing the original assessments. It was contended that there were conflicting opinions of the Tribunal particularly on sub s. (iii) of s. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... een debated, dissected, analysed and interpreted by various Benches of the Tribunal all over India. A Special bench of the Tribunal was constituted to pronounce on the scope and content of the various sub-cls. of s. 35B(1)(b). Our attention has not been drawn to any authority or Judicial pronouncement of the Bombay High Court or of the Supreme Court. If the ITO had attempted to revise the order in .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X