2018 (9) TMI 2110

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....evenue : Mr. Sachchidanand Dube, DR. ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2013-14. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-6 [in short 'CIT(A)'], Mumbai and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the 'Act'). 2. The ground of appeal reads as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....essee submits that the issue in the instant case has been decided against the assessee by the High Court in Martin & Harris (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (1994) 73 Taxman 555 (Cal), Ferro Alloys Corpn. Ltd. v. CIT (1992) 196 ITR 406 (Bom) and CIT v. Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. (1999) 105 Taxman 346 (Mad). The Ld. DR agrees with the above submission of the Ld. counsel. 5. We have heard the rival ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Corpn. Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Bombay High Court has held that the claim for deduction of interest levied u/s 220(2) u/s 215 and u/s 201(1A) was rightly rejected as not allowable u/s 37 of the Act. In Chennai Properties & Investment Ltd. (supra), the Hon'ble Madras High Court has held : "Income-tax is not allowable as business expenditure. The amount deducted as tax is not an item o....