TMI Blog2004 (2) TMI 292X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oreign construction and consultancy projects etc." 3. The assessee claimed Rs. 11,79,818 as expenditure in its International Contracts division for obtaining new contracts. The AO following the assessment order as also CIT(A) order in the preceding year disallowed these expenses as being of capital nature. In appeal, the CIT(A) confirmed the addition following his predecessor s order in the preceding year observing that no other facts were brought before him to differ the order from his predecessor in the case of the assessee for earlier year. 4. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that this ground is covered in favour of the assessee by detailed order of the Tribunal relating to the preceding year and filed a copy of the sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r and other projects and despite non-presentation of cheques by the parties, the company continued to own the liability to these parties and the payments were to be made as and when approached by the parties. It was further submitted that there was no waiver or remission of liability during the year. The CIT(A) however did not agree with the appellant and held that in view of the fact that cheques which were issued for the liability of the assessee was neither encashed nor revalidated, the liability of the assessee ceased to exist at the end of the accounting year and upheld the addition. 9. The learned authorised representative for the assessee submits that these cheques were issued towards refund of advance booking deposits received fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y in regard to the said amount. (i) CIT vs. Kharaiti Lal Co. (1989) 80 CTR (P H) 49 : (1989) 178 ITR 265 (P H) (ii) CIT vs. Lal Textile Finishing Mills (P) Ltd. (1990) 81 CTR (P H) 13 : (1989) 180 ITR 45 (P H) (iii) CIT vs. Combined Transport Co. (P) Ltd. (1988) 74 CTR (MP) 140 : (1988) 174 ITR 528 (MP) (iv) CIT vs. Haryana Co-operative Sugar Mills Ltd. (1985) 44 CTR (P H) 46 : (1985) 154 ITR 751 (P H) 11. The learned authorised representative also relied upon the decision reported as CIT vs. Chougule Co. (P) Ltd. (1991) 92 CTR (Bom) 35 : (1991) 189 ITR 473 (Bom) in support of the proposition that in the absence of any material brought on record suggesting that the assessee had no intention of honouring the debt with reference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... a debit in the P L a/c and in view of the nature of transaction and the circumstances of the case, he was of the opinion that no addition on this account was called for. 13. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the CIT(A) s order and further added that as in the previous year, the issue may be restored to the file of the AO for verification whether these amounts had been claimed as debits in the P L a/c, in the earlier years and of nature of these amounts. 14. We have considered rival submissions, the material on record and the judicial pronouncements cited by the learned authorised representative for the assessee and find force in the arguments advanced by the assessee. It is a common case that these amounts have not bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ory building, the assessee reduced the sale proceeds from the WDV and additions during the year of the relative block of assets, i.e., buildings owned by the assessee in various units entitled to the same rate of depreciation. According to the assessee, since the sale value of the factory building did not exceed the value of that block, there was no assessable gain under s. 50 of the IT Act. According to the assessee, although the company owned assets in different divisions, branches, units, etc., the assets falling within the same class and group of assets and entitled to same rate of depreciation shall collectively form a single block. The CIT(A) rejected the plea of the assessee and confirmed the action of the AO in taking the block of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd entitled to 33.33 per cent rate of depreciation should have been allowed as deduction under s. 50(1)(iii) in computing the short-term capital gains on sale of plant and machinery. Case laws relied upon: Mumbai Bench E decision in Artic vs. Asstt. CIT (1999) 64 TTJ (Mumbai) 291 : (1999) 68 ITD 462 (Mumbai) and Ocean Investment (P) Ltd. vs. Asstt. CIT (1997) 57 TTJ (Bom) 549." 20. After considering the above submissions, the Tribunal restored back the issue to the file of AO to decide in the light of fresh pleas taken and case laws relied upon by the assessee after giving opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 21. The learned authorised representative for the assessee reiterated the same submissions before us and cited the same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
