9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1479X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adhyaya For the Respondent :- R.S.Agrawal JUDGEMENT We have heard, Sri Manu Ghildyal, learned counsel for the appellants and Sri Rupesh Jain along with Sri R.S. Agrawal, learned counsel for the assessee. The appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: "1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in holding that claim of deprecia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eating various capital expenses as revenue expenses? 6. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in allowing deduction for loss on goods in transit being additional ground taken by the assessee in appellate proceedings whereas the claim for deduction is in respect of the preceding year which is still pending in appeal before Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s required to be maintained inter se between the parties, we are of the opinion that the Department cannot be permitted to question these issues when it was accepted by them in the previous years. Our view is supported by decisions of the Supreme Court in Radhasoami Satsang Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (1992) 193 ITR 321, Berger Paints India Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, (2004) 266 ITR 99 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ar 1993-94 under consideration provided the assessee's company gives up its claim for deduction in respect of the same for the Assessment Year 1993-94. We are of the opinion that no prejudice has been caused to the interest of the Revenue in allowing the claim of the assessee in the present Assessment Year subject to assessee's giving up its claim in the previous Assessment Year i.e. 1993 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
