https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205790 The Tribunal held that the AO and CIT(A) erred in applying Section 43B and disallowing customs duty of Rs. 1,24,97,664. The order of the CIT(A) was reversed, directing the AO to delete the addition. The Tribunal found that since no deduction was claimed for the customs duty, Section 43B was not applicable. The issues regarding jurisdiction and investment allowance were not pressed and thus not adjudicated. Subsequent appeals for the following years (1991-92 and 1992-93) were partly allowed in favor of the assessee based on similar reasoning. en-us Tue, 26 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Sep 2011 16:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205790 The Tribunal held that the AO and CIT(A) erred in applying Section 43B and disallowing customs duty of Rs. 1,24,97,664. The order of the CIT(A) was reversed, directing the AO to delete the addition. The Tribunal found that since no deduction was claimed for the customs duty, Section 43B was not applicable. The issues regarding jurisdiction and investment allowance were not pressed and thus not adjudicated. Subsequent appeals for the following years (1991-92 and 1992-93) were partly allowed in favor of the assessee based on similar reasoning. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 26 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205790