TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 1041X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the copies of the lease agreements in the first round of litigation, so in the Miscellaneous Petition. In the absence of furnishing the relevant lease agreements, the Tribunal had no other option but to give weightage to the finding of the Assessing Officer as recorded in the order impugned. In view of the undertaking given by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellant-assessee that the copies of the lease agreements would be furnished before the Tribunal within a period of four weeks from today, which is sine qua non for deciding the issue whether the transactions are lease or financial arrangement, we are of the considered opinion that the interest of justice and equity would be met in setting aside the impugned orders and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome Tax Appellate Tribunal Bangalore Bench A , Bangalore [ Tribunal for short] in ITA Nos.239, 242, 241, 246, 240 and 244/Bang/2018 dated 20.09.2019 and M.P.Nos.52 to 55/Bang/2020 relating to the assessment years 1995-96 to 2000-01 raising the following substantial questions of law: Common Substantial Questions of Law in ITA Nos.2 to 7/2022: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in perversely denying the Appellant s claim for deduction of depreciation on assets leased merely on the basis that lease agreements were not made available before it, ignoring the lease agreements filed vide Memo dated 31.07.2019 for AY 1998-99 and the assessment order detailing the clauses of the lease agree ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in ITA Nos.2, 5 and 7/2022: 6. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in denying depreciation on assets leased by the Appellant to M/s. Khatema Fibers merely for the reason that the appellant did not pay the excise duty component on the assets leased when the same did not form part of actual cost under Explanation 9 to Section 43[1]? 7. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal is right in law in denying depreciation on assets leased by the Appellant to M/s. Mohan Meakin on the basis that the appellant met only part of cost when the appellant had met ₹ 19,98,000/- out of ₹ 22,25,057/- constituting 89.8% of cost? Common Substantial Questions of L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tribunal is on a wrong notion that no lease agreements are placed on record by the assessee. The primary question involved herein i.e., whether the transactions are lease or financial arrangements would certainly depends on the clauses of the lease agreements which were made available before the Tribunal in the first round of litigation. This indeed has been considered by the Assessing Officer and it was recorded that these lease agreements have been examined, they are all identical and contained identical terms and conditions they are discussed below . The clauses in the lease deeds having been extracted by the Assessing Officer, the Tribunal ought to have considered the same. Even otherwise, in the Miscellaneous Petition Nos.52 t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erial on record. 8. Though the assessee has raised several substantial questions of law, we have considered only the substantial question of law No.1 which is the genesis for these appeals. The entire gamut of the order impugned revolves around the controversy whether the transactions involved in the case are lease or financial arrangement. In order to answer this controversy, it was necessary for the appellant-assessee to place on record the copies of the lease agreements. It may be true that the Tribunal was examining the matter in the second round but that itself would not preclude the assessee to place on record the copies of the lease agreements for the examination of the Tribunal notwithstanding certain clauses of the lease agreeme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
