Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (10) TMI 168 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT

2016 (10) TMI 168 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT - TMI - Revision u/s 263 - ITAT setting aside the order passed by the Commissioner under Section 263 - whether the Foreign Currency Convertible Bonds (FCCB) expenses of ₹ 2,35,78,000/not allowable as revenue expenditure as these FCCBs are convertible into equity shares at the option of the bond holders at a future date and hence the said expenses ought to have been treated as capital expenditure by the Assessing Officer in original assessment proceedin .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the Tribunal in Mahindra & Mahindra (supra) has been accepted by the Revenue. Therefore, as no reasons are forthcoming from the Revenue about distinguishing features in this case from that in Mahindra & Mahindra (supra), which had been accepted by the Revenue, we see no reason to entertain this appeal. - Income Tax Appeal No. 557 of 2014 - Dated:- 21-9-2016 - M. S. Sanklecha And S. C. Gupte, JJ. Mr.Ashok Kotangle I/b. Padma Divakar for Appellant ORDER P. C. 1. This Appeal under Section 260A of t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

cy Convertible Bonds (FCCB) expenses of ₹ 2,35,78,000/not allowable as revenue expenditure as these FCCBs are convertible into equity shares at the option of the bond holders at a future date and hence the said expenses ought to have been treated as capital expenditure by the Assessing Officer in original assessment proceedings? 3. For the subject assessment year, the Respondent assessee had claimed an amount of ₹ 2.35 crores as expenditure under Section 37(1) of the Act incurred for .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

11, the CIT exercised his powers of Revision under Section 263 of the Act and held that the expenditure of ₹ 2.35 crores had to be allowed under Section 35D of Act over a period of time and not allowed entirely in the subject assessment year, thus, directed the Assessing Officer to pass a fresh assessment order. 5. Being aggrieved, the Respondent assessee carried the issue in appeal to the Tribunal. The impugned order of the Tribunal placed reliance upon its decision in Mahindra & Mahi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version