9911796707
TMI Blog2000 (6) TMI 597X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that at the relevant time he was functioning in the High Commission of India at London of the rank of First Secretary. He was entitled to and obtained a diplomatic discount of 10% from the supplier of the car. 3. The Collector (Appeals), before whom this point was raised has said unlike in the case considered by the Tribunal the orders which was cited before him the appellant has failed to furnish evidence to prove that the supplier has actually extended diplomatic discount of 10%. We find it difficult to appreciate this point. The invoice issued by Mercedes Benz (United Kingdom), London to the appellant for the purchase of the car itself shows a diplomatic discount of 10% as a deduction from the price quoted. It is not clear what further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that the payment for the car was made partly in pounds sterling, partly in US dollar and partly in Deutsch Marks. The appellant says that generally any goods are priced and sold in the currency that is prevailing at the place of selling. If the car had been sold in Germany, he says, it would have been sold in Deutsch Marks and if in the US it would be in US dollar and so on. Accordingly the price of the car should have been quoted in the normal course would have been quoted to the appellant in sterling pounds. The seller was located in London as was the buyer and the car was delivered in London. The appellant professes inability to explain why the invoice was in Deutsch Marks. Whatever be the reason for that the appellant's contention cann ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lable to the appellant for use. Depreciation would be available to a person who purchased a car and used it sparingly or not at all for long period from the date on which he purchased it till it is no longer available to him to use. Such depreciation would not be available if the car was in a show room unsold, although by the fact of its not being sold for that period the car might have lost some value. There is a presumption that during the period when the car is in the possession of its owner it is put to use. This presumption is neither illogical nor unreasonable. It would however, be illogical or unreasonable to extend that presumption to a period during which the car clearly could not be used. We therefore do not find any merit in this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
