9911796707
TMI Blog2005 (10) TMI 55X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... II had to be treated as income of the assessee in the assessment year in which it made the collection. – further, as the sale under the hire-purchase agreement takes place only at the time mentioned in the agreement or at the option of the hirer, if so provided in the agreement, the dealer's margin or profit under the hire purchase agreement did not accrue to the assessee on the execution of the agreement by the hirer, therefore, Tribunal was correct in holding that the entire dealer's margin or profit under the hire purchase agreement did not accrue to the assessee on the execution of the agreement by the hirer – further, held that computer does 'manufacture or produce' within the meaning of section 32A of the Act and hence is entitled for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in confirming the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) order wherein it was held that computer does 'manufacture or produce' within the meaning of section 32A of the Act and hence is entitled for investment allowance?" The reference relates to the assessment year 1983-84. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present reference are as follows: The assessee is a limited company and deals in vehicles and financing of vehicles on hire-purchase basis. The assessee is also doing job work in its workshop. The Assessing Officer added to the total income of the assessee a sum of Rs. 7,10,824 which was found credited in the contingency account N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved, appealed to the Tribunal which upheld the decision of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. We have heard Sri R.K. Upadhya, learned standing counsel for the Revenue, and Sri R.S. Agrawal, learned counsel appearing for the assessee. So far as questions Nos. 1, 2 and 3 are concerned, we find that this court in the case of this very assessee reported in CIT v. Motor and General Sales P. Ltd. [2004] 266 ITR 261 (All) has held that the amounts collected by the assessee from the hire purchaser as sales tax were not really sales tax at all because the sale at that time had not taken place and the sales tax is payable when the sale takes place and in the case of hire purchase, the sale take ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
