1979 (9) TMI 123

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... of the assessee relates to the disallowance of consultation fee of Rs. 6,000. The assessee claimed payment of Rs. 8,000 on technical consultation fee. The ITO held that the payment of Rs. 8,000 was made to Shri M.L. Poddar brother of the assessee, for extra commercial consideration. The ITO also held that though it is claimed that Shri M.L. Poddar is a qualified Engineer but he held that the payme .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... to the assessee. The ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee is a non-technical man and in order to carry out orders received from H.E.C. Ltd. for sophisticated and technical jobs the assessee needed services of one qualified and experienced Engineer. He has also pointed out that Shri M.L. Poddar has got 10 years' experience of working as Production Engineer with HEC Ltd. and .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... wed capital. The AAC relied on the decision of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in CIT vs. Warner Hindustan Ltd. (1) for holding that the borrowed capital has to be excluded in computing the capital employed by the assessee under s. 80J of the said Act. The ld. deptl. representative has relied on the ruling reported in 117 ITR 68 whereas the ld. Counsel for the assessee has relied on the rulings repo .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X