9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 537X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax Act, 1961 (the Act) challenges the order dated 18th February, 2015 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order is in respect of Assessment Year 2002-03. 2. The Revenue urges only the following substantial question of law: Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in confirming the CIT(A) order in holding ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Assessing Officer disallowed only Rs. 2,42,22,50,540/on account of issue expenses on rupee loan / debenture/ fixed deposits and foreign currency loan and balance amount of Rs. 97,74,41,925/remained to be disallowed. As this expenditure was not routed through the P&L A/c, the same was not subjected to scrutiny of the statutory auditors of the assessee company nor the relevant evidences for allowab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er dated 4th December, 2012, the appeal of the respondent was allowed. This by holding that the reasons recorded for reopening were a subject matter for consideration by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order passed on 25th February, 2005 under Section 143(3) of the Act and in particular in paragraph 7 thereof. In the above view, it held that the reopening notice was based on mere change of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... paragraph no.7 examines the entire claim of Rs. 339.96 crores, which includes Rs. 97.74 crores. In fact, the impugned order records the fact that the order dated 25th February, 2005 under Section 143(3) of the Act records that Rs. 339.96 crores is not been routed through the profit and loss account and yet disallowed only a part of the claim to the extent of Rs. 242 crores. Thus, it is self-evide ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
