TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 738X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e is concerned as well and the Tribunal be directed to consider it afresh when the appeals as aforesaid are being decided. We therefore permit both sides to argue on the question of the claim of provision for “Mark to Market” loss and whether it was contingent as urged and whether it was crystallized at the end of the year and therefore not allowable as revenue deduction in the previous relevant y ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no. 4(A) is concerned that pertains to disallowance by the Assessing Officer of ₹ 1,24,22,472/under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the light of the order passed by this court in the assessee's Writ Petition no. 1744/2014 and since this issue has been restored to the file of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mr. Malhotra would contend that this Court should clarify that it w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at is already admitted by this Court in ITXA/1521/2012 on 14th November, 2014. 4. On this point we have heard both Counsel. Since this point has been admitted by this Court in the above appeal we admit this appeal on question no 4(B). 5. With the consent of both sides we take up the appeal for hearing forthwith. 6. Mr Dastur, learned Senior Counsel appearing for the assessee would submit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion for applying the Revenue Circular. 8. After hearing both sides and perusing the orders of the authorities under the Income Tax Act we are of the opinion that since the appeal ITA No.456/Mum/2012 and ITA No. 660/Mum/2012 from which the Writ Petition 1744 of 2014 arises has been restored to the file of the the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for disposal afresh on merits and in accordance with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
