TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 1492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he questions of law have been framed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as the Tribunal) at the behest of the assessee and thus the cause title of the case ought to be corrected and should therefore read as J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. CIT and not CIT Vs. J.K. Synthetics Ltd. as shown in the cause list. The Registry is directed to correct the record. 2. The following four ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITAT was correct in confirming the disallowance of ₹ 36,90,083/- being excise duty liability on the polymer chips on the ground that the same did not accrue or arise during the relevant previous year? 4. Whether the Appellate Tribunal was right in law in holding that the grounds of appeal with regard to the levy of interest u/s. 139(8) and S.215 of the Income Tax Act were not maintainable ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... question was answered in favour of the assessee. Therefore, question no.2 of the instant reference will have to be answered accordingly. Question no.2 is answered in favour of the petitioner / assessee and against the revenue. 5. Learned counsel for the assessee submits that question no.3 of the instant reference relating to the disallowance of excise duty liability, formed a subject matter of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat it does not arise in the circumstances stated above. We are inclined to accept the request made. On this limited aspect, the case is remanded to the Assessing Officer. 6. As far as the last question is concerned, learned counsel for the assessee fairly states that the same has to be answered against the assessee in view of the judgment in the case of the assessee in J.K. Synthetics Ltd. Vs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
