TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1001X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... For the Respondent : Shri Roopchand Sr.D.R. ORDER Per Shri Mukul Kr. Shrawat, Judicial Member :- This is an appeal at the behest of the Assessee which has emanated from the order of Learned CIT(Appeals)-XI, Ahmedabad dated 22/05/2009 and the substantive ground is Ground No.1(i); reproduced below:- 1(i) The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) XI, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as CIT(A)] erred in confirming that the action of Assessing Officer in recomputing book profit u/s.115JB by adding a sum of Rs.28,77,242/- being interest expenditure disallowed in regular assessment u/s.14A. 2. At the outset, ld.AR Mr.S.N.Soparkar has made a statement at Bar that the additional ground raised in respect of the re-opening of the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s also quoted that the computation for regular assessment is a different issue, whereas while computing the book profit only certain aspects can be adjusted as per Explanation to section 115JB and no other adjustment in respect of any allowance or disallowance made during the computation normal income can be considered for the computation of the book profit for the purpose of section 115JB of the I.T.Act. Although this observation was made by the Learned CIT(Appeals) in paragraph No. 2.3.1, but the view was taken in favour of the Revenue, therefore the assessee being aggrieved is now in appeal. With this brief background, our attention was drawn on a decision of ITAT Delhi Bench C pronounced in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. reported at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TA No(s) . 1 M/s.Essar Teleholdings Ltd. vs. DCIT ITAT E Bench Mumbai in ITA No.3850/Mum/2010 for A.Y. 2005-06 order dated 29/07/2011 2 Quippo Telecom Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Asst.CIT ITAT F Bench New Delhi in ITA No.4931/Del/2010 for A.Y. 2007-08 order dated 18/02/2011 3 ACIT vs. JK Paper Ltd. and JK Paper Ltd. vs. ACIT (Cross appeals) ITAT D Bench Ahmedabad in ITA Nos.979/Ahd/06 for A.Y. 2002-03, ITA Nos.578 738/Ahd/07 (A.Y.2003-04) and ITA Nos.346 390/Ahd/2008 (A.Y.2004-05) order dated 04/09/2009 6. Respectfully following the aforementioned orders as also the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd.vs. CIT reported at [2002]255 ITR ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
