TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (1) TMI 179
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....939/03 relating to the assessment years 1999-00 and 2000-01 respectively, but insofar as it relates to the order concerning I.T.A. No.3125/04 an appeal by the Revenue before the Tribunal purporting to arise out of the order passed by the Commissioner Income Tax (appeals) [for short CIT (appeals)] in I.T.A. No.76/AC-11(2)/CIT(A)-1/03-04, appeal had been admitted by this Court on 16.8.07 to examine the following questions as indicated in this appeal: "(i) Whether the Tribunal was correct in holding that the interest deduction claimed by the assessee is an allowable deduction without taking into account the fact that the assessee had not utilized the loan amount in the course of its business activity and the same had been utilized by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....000/-. The Assessing Officer had also disallowed various items of expenditure as part of business expenditure as had been claimed by the assessee totalling a sum of Rs. 33,18,099/- as under: Rs. Conveyance 2,939 Insurance-Texas & Verifone 1,49,626 Insurance - Cielo Car 5,639 Advertisement Charges 30,243 Rules and Taxes 300 Telephone charges 2,123 Repair and Maintenance 2,19,745 Printing and Stationery 364 Bank charges 12,77,714 Crech A/c 24,105 Landscape Maintenance 2,56,282 Cleaning charges 50,119 Security charges 42,858 Prior period expenses 23,336 Miscellaneous expenses 2,146 Legal and professional charges 61,150 Refreshments ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e order related to not allowing the entire interest. Claim of the assessee is that by limiting the amount CIT (appeals) has rectified this appeal of assessee, so also in respect of the remaining disallowed part of the expenses. These two appeals along with appeals of the revenue and the assessee for the subsequent issues were all clubbed together and disposed of by the common order dated 26.8.2012. In this background the present appeal of the revenue. 5. During the pendency of the appeals and the revenue having realized that if the appeal confines to the order relating to the I.T.A. No. 3125/2004 if cannot possibly allow scope for the revenue to agitate substantial loss of revenue in view of the order passed by the CIT (Appeals) initiall....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ng to the order in I.T.A. No. 939/2003 before it. The application is opposed very vehemently by the assessee. 8. Mr. A. Shankar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent has raised several contentions. Firstly that amendment under order VI rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure does not apply, secondly that allowing an application of this nature alters the character of the appeal and it virtually becomes an appeal for some other order and thirdly that at this point of time it is barred by limitation. That Section 260-A of the Act imposes fixed period of limitation and though there is an enabling provision to condone the delay that cannot be achieved in the indirect manner unless commencement of the appeal has been preferred ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etc., is not a feasible course of action at this point of time. Particularly as one of the contentions urged by Mr. A. Shankar, learned counsel for the assessee is that if it is to be taken as an appeal against the order passed in I.T.A. No. 3125/04 questions not relating to this appeal cannot be permitted to agitate and submission is technically sound within the scope of section 260-A of the Act. 12. It is therefore, not proper to allow the application of this nature at this point of time. However, it is open for the revenue to agitate the matter separately and in a manner permitted in law and if they are so desirous to pursue the question, arising out of the order of the Tribunal relating to the order in I.T.A.No.939/2003. 13. Insof....