9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 252X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see with regard thereto was partially upheld, then, there was no justification for allowing the assessee's Appeal only in part - the sustainance of ₹ 9,01,98,977/- was deleted - the view taken cannot be termed as perverse as it is in consonance with the documents and materials produced - if the findings of facts are not perverse or vitiated by any error of law apparent on the face of the rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion No. 1 can be termed as substantial question of law. 3) The Revenue could not have raised question No. 2 as it had not filed any Appeal, cross objections before the Tribunal, nor did it point out to the Tribunal that in the absence of an Appeal by it possibly it could not have impugned the Commissioner's order in its entirety on this dis-allowance or deduction. Therefore, he does not pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 30th October, 2001. The case was selected for scrutiny and the Assessing Officer found that the Assessee had significant investment in equity and preference share of HGPL, in which, management of company has active participation. The Assessee did not charge any interest aggregating to ₹ 46.64 crores on advances given to M/s. HPGL. A query was raised why the interest was not charged on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s upheld. Thus, the Appeal of the Assessee was partly allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 7) Upon perusal of the entire material, the Tribunal arrived at the conclusion that M/s. HGPL was going through huge loss and was not in a position to repay the principal amount, leave alone interest. In these circumstances and when the Assessing Officer made an estimation of his own and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
