Referring to the provision of Article 12 and 7 of the India-France DTAA which demonstrate that interest payment made by the permanent establishment to the head office are not taxable in the hands.
Finding that the Settlement Commission has not discarded the evidentiary value of the statement of witness (Rajesh Doshi) who has admitted to the modus operandi of availing bogus purchase bill from.
Referring to the decision of Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Petro Products Pvt Ltd, the Mumbai ITAT reiterated that for the purpose of levying penalty, the provisions of the Income tax Act.
On finding profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking within the meaning of an expression under section 80-IB, the Mumbai ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s 80-IB.
While setting aside the revision order passed on the ground that the AO did not conduct any enquiry or verification which should have been made with regards to income from auditorium hire charges,.