9911796707
TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 46X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d losses is an admissible deduction? - 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in its conclusion that the amount of Rs. 1,46,950 actually represented amounts withheld and not realisable by the assessee and hence admissible as a deduction?" - we answer both the questions referred to us in the affirmative, against the Revenue and in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come-tax Appellate Tribunal was right in its conclusion that the amount of Rs. 1,46,950 actually represented amounts withheld and not realisable by the assessee and hence admissible as a deduction?" The respondent-assessee is a company. The assessee filed its return for the assessment year 1985-86 declaring the income as nil. The assessee, in the computation of its income, had taken into account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pursued the matter in further appeal before the Tribunal. The Tribunal found that though the amount was payable to the assessee, it related to the supplies made by the assessee in the earlier years and the railways could not have deducted the amount in the current bills if it did not relate to the bills passed for payment in the previous year. The Tribunal factually found that the assessee had no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the previous year relevant to the assessment year in question. There is no dispute that it was a business loss and the only question that was urged before the Appellate Tribunal was that it was not allowable in the assessment year in question. The fact remains that the amount due to the assessee was not received by the assessee. We are therefore of the opinion that the unrealised amount cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
