9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (1) TMI 1348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AM This appeal by the Assessee is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) dated 6.4.2010 pertaining to assessment year 2005-06. 2. The first issue raised is that Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) acted arbitrarily in making an addition of ₹ 5027731/- under section 41(1) of the Income Tax Act. 3. In this case the Assessing Officer noted th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ax (Appeals) confirmed that addition was rightly made u/s 41(1) of the IT Act. 5. Against this order the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. We have heard the rival contentions in the light of the material produced and the precedent relied upon. We find that the creditors as noted by the Assessing Officer are the entities with whom the assessee had dealings earlier and the balances are outst ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to income-tax as the income of that previous year, whether the business or profession in respect of which the allowance or deduction has been made is in existence in that year or not; or 7. From the above, it is clear that Act postulates there should be benefit obtained by the assessee by way of remission or cessation of liability. In this case, we note that there is no document on record w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the expenditure is clearly in capital nature. For this purpose, he placed reliance upon Hon ble Apex Court in the case of Punjab State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. vs. C.I.T. 225 ITR 792 (SC) and Brooke Bond India Ltd. vs. C.I.T. 225 ITR 798. 10. Upon assessee s appeal Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the addition. 11. Against this order the Assessee is in appea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
