TMI Blog2011 (11) TMI 738X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e order dated 30.4.2010 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (tribunal, for short) under Section 271 (1)(c) of the Act. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant had made a false claim and had furnished incorrect particulars in respect of the deduction claimed under Section 80HHC of the Act. The assessee had excluded domestic turnover from trading in shares as sole pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... R 553 (Ker.) and Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Parry Agro Industries Ltd., reported as (2002) 257 ITR 41(Mad.). The assessee, who is an individual, was carrying on the business of exports in the name of M/s RMX Jose and had disclosed total export turnover of ₹ 36,90,41,387/- and domestic turnover of ₹ 4,80,951/-. The assessee also trading in share in another sole proprietorship, M/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iews were possible. The question raised was debateable. It may be noted that the Assessment Year involved is 2004-05 and it is accepted and admitted that the respondent-assessee had maintained separate books of account for the two sole proprietorships. Relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Reliance Petro Products (P) Ltd. (2010) 322 ITR 158, the tribunal has held pena ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
