TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2004 (12) TMI 300
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), Jalandhar for the asst. yr. 1985-86. 2. The only ground taken by the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) was not justified in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 4,65,579 claimed in respect of scientific research under s. 35 of the IT Act. The facts of the case are that the assessee had claimed deduction of expenditure of Rs. 4,65,579 (being expenditu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ority with a view to ascertain whether the assessee was entitled to its claim under s. 35(2)(ia). The relevant findings of the aforesaid order of the Tribunal are as under: "6. Finding merits in the contention of the assessee, we restore the matter to the AO to enable him to do the needful because no disallowance could possibly be made unless the prescribed authority had decided the question whet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....low the impugned expenditure without referring the same to the prescribed authority. Reliance was placed on the judgment of Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hope Textiles Ltd. (1997) 143 CTR (MP) 333 : (1997) 225 ITR 993 (MP), wherein it was held that where the matter was sent back to the authorities below with specific directions, the authority below has no jurisdiction to enter i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... directions of the Tribunal. In the present case, the AO has not made the disallowance by relying on the opinion of the prescribed authority. In fact, perusal of the orders of the authorities below show that no such reference has been made to the prescribed authority. Since there was specific direction of the Tribunal, the AO was bound to comply with the same instead of making such disallowance. H....