9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 979X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ims that the vouchers were available to substantiate the payment of hire charges - Held that:- This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the entire issue is remitted back to the file of the AO. AO shall re-examine the matter in the light of the material that may be produced by the assessee and thereafter decide the issue afresh in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. - ITA No.565/Chny/2018 - - - Dated:- 3-12-2018 - Shri N.R.S. Ganesan, Judicial Member And Shri A. Mohan Alankamony, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Sh. N. Devanathan, Advocate For the Re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Referring to the judgment of Kerala High Court in CIT v. Nidish Transport Corporation (1990) 185 ITR 669, the Ld.counsel submitted that transfer of registration is not necessary for transfer of ownership of motor vehicle. According to the Ld. counsel, transfer takes effect when the motor vehicle was handed over to the assessee. Even before the transfer is effected in the registration certificate, the assessee used the vehicle as its own. Therefore, according to the Ld. counsel, the assessee is entitled for depreciation. Hence, the Assessing Officer is not justified in saying that there was no addition to the fixed asset. 4. Referring to the claim of ₹ 12,48,980/-, the Ld.counsel submitted that it is hire charges paid to other ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e registration certificate. The failure to report the same to the registering authority may entail levy of penalty prescribed under section 31 of the Motor Vehicles Act or section 112 of the Act. Beyond that, it does not affect the passing of title. Law is fairly clear that registration is not necessary to pass title in the motor vehicle. The decisions of the Supreme Court in Panna Lal v. Chand Mal, AIR 1980 SC 871 ; [1980] ACJ 233 and the deci sions of this court in Aliyar Kunju v. Subair Khan [1984] KLT 268, Kunju raman v. Saramma [1986] KLT 742 and M. Swaminathan v. C. K. Jayalakshmi Amma [1989] 66 Comp Cas 503 ; [1987] 2 KLT 292, establish that for the transfer of ownership of a motor vehicle, mutation of the same in the certificate of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
