9911796707
TMI Blog1991 (1) TMI 439X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ollowing questions to this Court: "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether the learned Tribunal was justified in upholding the disallowance of ₹ 2,89,129 out of the expenses incurred on account of repairs to machinery? 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, whether the learned Tribunal was justified in confirming the disallowance of ₹ 46,004 out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erest charged?" 2. As regards question Nos. 1 to 3 are concerned, in our opinion, they are pure questions of fact. The Tribunal has found the fact that these questions are not relatable to the business of the company and, therefore, were rightly disallowed. If expenses are not related to the business then they cannot be allowed and whether there is this relation or not, cannot be regarded as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ability or to the quantum is a question of fact because this challenge had to be raised before the Tribunal out of whose order reference is sought. When the Tribunal has observed that liability to pay interest was not in issue, it obviously means that such a contention was not raised before it. It is, no doubt, true that in the application under section 256(2) of the Act it has been contended that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 144B such a liability is not mentioned. If the liability had been challenged, then, according to the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court, an appeal did lie but when the Tribunal holds, as it is done in the present case, there is no challenge to the liability to pay interest, we are afraid that we are bound by the aforesaid decision of the Supreme Court which states that in the absence of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
