TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 1615X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of FCCB is an expense for raising a loan, therefore, the expense is revenue in nature. It observed that the Revenue has not shown any reasons as to why this Court should take different view in this case from the view taken by the various High Courts in the country on an identical issue. Addition of assignment of loan claimed as short term capital loss - loss arise because of lesser capital amount received and not on sale of capital gain and so cannot be equated to the short term capital loss - ITAT deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- It is an agreed position between the parties that the above decision passed today in case of M/s. Siemens Nixdorf [ 2019 (9) TMI 199 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] would apply to the present facts - No substantia ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B of ₹ 1304.13 Crores which is in capital in nature? (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the disallowance of expenses of ₹ 23,21,766/on the issue of Foreign Currency Convertible Bond on the interpretation of DTAA? (c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 17,75,67,418/arising out of assignment of loan to M/s. Western Alliance Power Ltd., by M/s. Reliance Patalganga Power Ltd. claimed as short term capital loss without appreciating the fact that the loss arise because of lesser capital amount received and not on sale of capital gain and so cannot be equated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tical issue. (iii) In view of the above, the question as framed does not give rise to any substantial question of law. Thus, not entertained. 4 Re. Question (c): (i) The impugned order of the Tribunal dismissed the Revenue s appeal by inter alia placing reliance upon the decision of its coordinate bench in the case of Siemens Nixdorf Information Systeme GmbH v/s. DDIT 68 taxmann 113. This on the basis that it was an agreed position between the parties that, the decision taken in the Siemens (supra) would equally apply to the case of the RespondentAssessee; (ii) Being aggrieved by the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Siemens (supra), the Revenue had filed an appeal to this Court being Income Tax Appeal No. 1366 of 2017. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
