TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee is directed against the order dated 28.3.2011 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax u/s 263 of the Act, in relation to the assessment year 2006-2007. 2. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3) determining total income at ₹ 13.65 crore. During the year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l submissions and perused the relevant material on record. From the impugned order it is noticed that the only dispute is about the deductibility in full or otherwise of the FCCB issue expenses amounting to ₹ 2.35 crore. Whereas the assessee claimed deduction for such expenditure u/s 37(1) in one go which was accepted by the A.O., the learned CIT opined that this expenditure should have been ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined to cases in which the assessment order is not only erroneous but also prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. If an issue is found to be settled in assessee s favour, then the CIT can not pass revisional order. Similarly if an issue is debatable, in the sense that two possible views exist on the issue and the AO has followed one of such legally possible views, then also the CIT cannot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
