TMI Blog1998 (12) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otted that the question of compensating Lucas (England) in cash might arise - hence it can not be said that there was a debt owed by the respondent to Lucas to be taken into account for the purposes of computing the capital u/s 801 - - - - - Dated:- 10-12-1998 - Judge(s) : S. P. BHARUCHA. and D. P. MOHAPATRA. ORDER The order of the Tribunal states that clause 4(ii) of the agreement date ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue that on the relevant date, for the purpose of section 80J of the Income-tax Act, the shares had not been allotted by the respondent to Lucas (England) and that the value thereof had been shown in the respondent's balance-sheet. In his submission, therefore, there was a debt and it had to be taken into account for the purposes of computing the respondent's capital in the application of sect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to pay in praesenti or in futuro an ascertainable sum of money." What is relevant for our purpose is that a liability depending upon a contingency is not a debt in praesenti or in futuro till the contingency has happened. In the present case, the liability of the respondent to Lucas (England) is to issue to Lucas (England) equity shares of a value equivalent to the amount advanced by Lucas (Eng ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
