9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 640X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of block of assets. Once the fact that the block of assets computed at a sum of ₹ 2,77,3,222/- for the assessment year 2002-03 is admitted, there remains no further controversy as regards the fact that during the year under consideration there was an addition of a sum of ₹ 4.41 crores approximately. The opening balance and the addition during the year aggregate to a sum of ₹ 7,18,62,306/-. The sale took place at a sum of ₹ 8,23,75,000/-. The difference between the two would be a sum of ₹ 1,05,12,694/- as computed by the assessee.We find that the computation made by the assessee is a correct computation - Decided in favour of assessee Interest free loans or advances to its sister concerns - disallowance u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA No.15 of 2008 which we disposed of today by a separate judgment. The questions formulated at the time of admission of the appeal are as follows: (i) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the disallowance of ₹ 48,21,901/- out of the interest expenditure incurred by the appellant for the purposes of its business and allowable under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, and its purported findings in that behalf are arbitrary, unreasonable and perverse? (ii) Whether on a true and proper interpretation of the agreements dated October 8, 2002 and December 19, 2002 and the provisions of sections 2(42C) and 50B of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the direction of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. In respect of sale proceeds for plant machinery for both the tea gardens the assessee received ₹ 8,23,75,000/- out of which it claimed the WDV at ₹ 7,18,62,306/- and the balance amount for ₹ 1,05,12,694/- has been shown as short term capital gain. It has been stated by the A/R that the assessee had eight tea gardens in all out of which two gardens have been sold. It is further seen from the Tax Audit Report that the opening WDV for all the eight tea gardens were ₹ 2,77,34,222/-. Adding with this, the cost of new plant machinery added for this year amounting to ₹ 4,39,68,100/- and ₹ 1,59,984/-. Out of this new addition plant machinery amounting to ₹ 4,39,68,100/- was added in the Tippuk Tea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claim is contrary to the two agreements to sale executed by the appellant. Thus the appellant s contention of disclosing only short term capital gains on Plant Machinery is totally erroneous and is rejected. In a further appeal by the assessee, the Tribunal upheld the views of the CIT(A) by stating as follows: On hearing most contested argument and counter-reply from both the sides, perusing the orders of the authorities below, we find no reason to interfere in the order of the CIT(A) particularly because it is a speaking one on the issue with logical reasoning which dismissing the ground of the assessee. Accordingly, the assessee does not succeed on this ground. We have heard the learned Advocates appearing for the parti ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... alleging that the capital gains have to be computed on the basis of slump sale. This was not a case of slump sale. Therefore, there was no reason why assessment should be made on that basis. The Tribunal did not go into the matter at all. Mr. Nizamuddin is unable to show as to why and how can the sale be treated as a slump sale. He is unable to dispute that in the assessment year 2002-03, the plant and machinery of all the gardens had a written down value of ₹ 2,77,34,222/-. For the year under consideration, a separate standard could not have been insisted upon. That would not also be in accordance with the concept of block of assets. Once the fact that the block of assets computed at a sum of ₹ 2,77,3,222/- for the assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
