9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (1) TMI 44X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rong and virtually it is a nonspeaking order, deciding nothing. This appeal is allowed on this ground as Tribunal has not applied its mind to the question referred which should be answered by the Tribunal. Therefore the matter is remanded to the Tribunal back to decide the appeal in accordance with law after considering the reasons given by the appellate authority as well as submissions made by both the parties by giving reasons. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d been added and the total sum came to be Rs.2,28,57,374/and the same had been claimed to be bad debt. The assessee produced the agreement between the assessee and the MECON (Nigeria) Ltd. According to the agreement, M/s. MECON (Nigeria) Ltd. was appointed by the assessee as subcontractor and the assessee authorized M/s. MECON (Nigeria) Ltd. to receive payment due to the assessee company obviously in Nigeria. The assessee claimed that the amount from sundry debtors could not be realized and hence it constituted bad debt. The Assessing Officer then observed that right to realize the sundry debtors was vested in M/s. MECON (Nigeria) Ltd., which is admittedly subsidiary company of the assessee and it realized the sundry debtor on behalf of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t since there was no debtor for the respondent company, there was no question of any debt becoming bad. The Commissioner of Income Tax observed that the claim of the respondent company can be considered as a trading loss with reference to the provisions of section 29 of the Income Tax Act and after relying upon some judgments, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed relief of Rs.2,20,21,891/, which represented trading loss but did not allow the relief of Rs.8,35,482/, which represented written down value of the fixed assets of the assessee, which, according to the appellant, is held by M/s. MECON (Nigeria) Ltd. 5. Against the appellate order dated 5th March, 1992 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Ranchi, the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appeal for the assessment year 1990-91 to 1993-94. The issue has been raised with regard to chargeability of interest U/s.215 which, in our view, is to be allowed to the assessee in view of the fact that once an income which cannot form part of the taxable income of the assessee cannot be considered for levy of interest U/s.215 in view of the fact that the estimate for payment of advance tax is the prerogative of the assessee and, therefore, the department cannot extract interest U/s.215 on the basis of their regular assessment on such income which was never considered as income by the assessee in the first place. It is again a consequential point which has been dealt with by us in the appeals filed by the assessee for respective assessmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
