9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 223X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s four questions of law in these appeals. The first question relates to the sum of Rs. 2,46,411/- claimed as amortized advance rent against the cost of land for the assessee's wind power project in Gujarat. The Revenue had contended that this long term lease would grant enduring benefit to the assessee. At the outset this Court notices that the decision is squarely covered against the assessee in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee had admitted that the actual expenditure debited as against the provision made can be or cannot be the same and therefore concluded that such provision therefore was a contingent liability by virtue of uncertainty of the quantum involved. 14. The Tribunal affirmed the CIT (Appeals) order by placing reliance on certain judgments of the Calcutta and Bombay High Courts. The Revenue had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s therefore closed in above terms." The third and fourth questions are interconnected. They relate to unaccounted refundable security deposit and unaccounted refundable maintenance security deposit receivable by the assessee. During the proceedings the assessee had relied on additional evidence. The ITAT directed the deletion of the sums brought to tax on these heads. The record reveals that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
