Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (7) TMI 1735 - HC - Income TaxEligibility of depreciation on trucks - ownership of trucks - Held that:- In the instant case, the Assessing Officer doubted the very genuineness of the transaction and also as to whether the vehicles were in existence and the assessee had acted only as a financier. However, for the subsequent year, the details were verified and it was recorded by the tribunal that the vehicles were registered in various States and it is wrong on the part of the Assessing Officer as well as the CIT (Appeals) to hold that no assets are involved in the lease transaction. We find from the order passed by the Tribunal that, the Tribunal had gone through the copies of the sub-lease agreement, the relevant purchase bills for the vehicles and other connected papers including bank documents and registration certificate, etc., and rendered such finding. Thus, the issue has been factually concluded by the tribunal and the case of the assessee is also fully supported by the decision in the case of I.C.D.S. Ltd. [2013 (1) TMI 344 - SUPREME COURT], which decision the Revenue does not dispute. Carry forward business losses can be set off against dividend income - Held that:- It is not in dispute that the transaction was identical and the Tribunal considered the submissions and held that the assessee's plea that the investments were business investments and the interest on borrowings made for these investments have to be allowed under the head 'business income'. If in substance investments are business investments, the interest on borrowings made for those investments have to be allowed irrespective of the fact that income from dividend has to be assessed under a separate head. The Revenue did not dispute that the transaction was identical, neither before the Tribunal nor before us. Therefore, the case on hand stands covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee's sister concern [Shriram Investments [2014 (11) TMI 55 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] Chit fund as not a money lending business - Tribunal treating moneys not paid by the prize chit winners as bad debts ? - relationship of creditor and debtor between the assessee and the subscribers to the chit to warrant the treatment of default in payment by them as bad debt ? - Held that:- This issue is squarely covered in the assessee's own case in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s.Shriram Chits & Investments Ltd [2012 (4) TMI 630 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] as held Going by the obligation of the foreman arising under ss. 21 and 22 of the Chit Funds Act to make good the default to the successful bidder on the subsequent day transaction, the claim was rightly considered by the Tribunal as one allowable under s. 36 of the Act. - Decided against revenue
|