Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

A lesson from case of Avasarala Technologies Ltd -not furnishing relevant details and evidence before authorities and furnishing superfluous documents can be costly.

Income Tax - Direct Tax Code - DTC - By: - CA DEV KUMAR KOTHARI - Dated:- 31-12-2015 - References: AVASARALA TECHNOLOGIES LTD. Versus JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX 2015 (8) TMI 521 - SUPREME COURT Analysis of facts: Vendor of plant and machinery: Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Purchaser of plant and machinery: AVASARALA TECHNOLOGIES LTD Lessee: Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board Who was previous owner. Lessor: AVASARALA TECHNOLOGIES LTD, the new owner. Sale deed dated September 29 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

essee; and, therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the transaction entered into between the assessee and the APSEB should be treated only as finance transaction and not a genuine lease transaction wherein a sum of ₹ 1,60,18,854 was advanced by the assessee to the APSEB. However, the Assessing Officer excluded from the gross total of income, the leased rental offered for taxation by the assessee to the extent of ₹ 14,63,322 (rupees fourteen lakhs sixty-three thousand t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

onfirmed the order of assessment in so far as it relates to rejection of claim for depreciation in respect of the machinery/equipment in question purchased from the APSEB and leased back to the APSEB. The Tribunal, by means of its order dated October 30, 2001, rejected the appeal filed by the assessee challenging the correctness of the order annexure G passed by the appellate authority. From above observations it is clear that the assessee did not provide certain details as required by the Asses .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ds of the assessee (sic. APSEB) WDV in hands of previous owner could have been confirmed. It can be nil due to dep[recitation allowed @ 100% but it does not mean that the asset had no market value. details of depreciation claimed by the previous owner, It could be informed and it can be 100% of cost considering the nature of machinery, but it does not mean that the market value of asset was nil or cost of asset in hands of assessee was nil. APSEB also could have confirmed that on sale, the sale .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

r dated March 25, 1999, stating that some of the details called for by the Assessing Officer had already been furnished. From observations in the judgment we find that before the CIT (A) a valuation report was furnished to establish existence of asset. This seems to be a superfluous document. Because the valuation may not be much relevant, the price can be negotiated between parties. Furthermore, an asset which is already is use and is being used is valuable asset, irrespective of fact that the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t the transaction was sham and to avoid tax, it was finding of fact, and not being perverse or patently wrong, the High Court and the Supreme Court could not interfere into the same. What assessee missed? In case of sale and lease back transactions certain facts in ground realities are important, and therefore, in such circumstances the transactions must satisfy the factual ground realities. Some of such realities could have been brought on record if the transactions was planned properly. For ex .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

and machinery was due for over haul, the same could be sold, transferred and handed over to the buyer. The buyer gets the plant and machinery insured, and make arrangement for other insurance like workmen s insurance for the purpose of overhaul of plant and machinery purchased. Buyer could have dismantled it, overhaul it with necessary material, spares, and technology by deploying technical team at its own cost. After such overhaul, repairs, etc. The same could be delivered back to the previous .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     bird's eye view     ↓  


|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version