TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 628X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act ? - Held that:- Question is covered by judgment of Commissioner of Income Tax, Moradabad and another Vs. M/s Radico Khaitan Ltd., Bareilly Road, Rampur [2015 (9) TMI 1479 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT] wherein it has been held that Department cannot be permitted to question issues which were accepted by it in the previous years and stood answerd in favour of Assessee against Department by relying on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hat amount of interest and financial charges is allowable under Section 36(i)(iii) of the Act. ? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in law in restoring this issue to the file of the A.O. with the direction to decide the same in the light of its decision for A.Y. 1993-94 whereas deduction on the same amount should not be claimed by the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... td., Bareilly Road, Rampur wherein it has been held that Department cannot be permitted to question issues which were accepted by it in the previous years and stood answerd in favour of Assessee against Department by relying on the decision in DCIT Vs. Core Health Ltd., 298 ITR 194 (SC). The question no. 3 and 4 are stated to be covered by judgment dated 4th September, 2013 in Commissioner of Inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
