9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 1424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) Whether on the facts and circumstances of case, the ITAT was correct in law in deleting the addition of ₹ 9,95,426 on account of disallowance of depreciation on the assets (buildings) not registered in the name of the assessee company? - ITA No. 593/2015 & ITA No. 594/2015 - - - Dated:- 29-9-2015 - DR. S.MURALIDHAR MR. VIBHU BAKHRU JJ. For the Appellant: Mr. N.P. Sahni, Senio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sahni, learned Senior Standing counsel for the Revenue states that the Revenue does not press Question No.3. 4. Question No. 4 concerns the deletion made by the ITAT of the addition of ₹ 8,40,000 on the ground that this was a sum paid by the Assessee to one Mr. R.N.Mahindru out of undisclosed sources. While the AO has extensively relied upon the statement of Mr. Mahindru made under Sec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uaded to frame a question on this issue. 6. Question No.5 relates to the deletion made by the ITAT of the addition of ₹ 1,15,00,000 made by the AO while calculating the book profits under Section 115JB of the Act. The question was whether the Fringe Benefit Tax ( FBT ) should form part of the book profits in terms of the Explanation 1 to Section 115JB of the Act. Circular No. 8 of 2005 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cision in Apollo Tyres Ltd. v. Commissioner of income Tax (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC) which held that the Assessing Officer does not have the jurisdiction to go behind the net profit shown in the profit and loss account except to the extent provided in the Explanation to Section 115J. The Court declines to frame a question on the above issue. 8. Consequently, the appeal is admitted limited to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
