TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 433X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that:- The documents on record prove that rebate was allowed as one-time expenditure during the relevant assessment year in pursuance of the decision of the board of directors dated 18.04.2002. It is finding of fact. Therefore, no substantial question of law arises for consideration by this court - Decided against the Revenue. - 207 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 14-11-2011 - HEMANT GUPTA, SANDHAWALIA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Appellate Tribunal on this issue ? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Income-tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in deleting the addition of Rs. 7,09,57,404 despite the fact that the assessee has failed to establish that this expenditure was an allowable expenditure as the assessee had no legal obligation of incurring such expenditure ? 3. Whether, o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce companies, HSIDC, HFC, etc., against the advances received during the years 1991 to 2002. 3. The argument of learned counsel for the appellant that the assessee has not produced any additional evidence to justify the expenditure in the relevant assessment year after the earlier order of the Tribunal dated February 27, 2007, is not tenable. The documents on record prove that rebate was allo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
