9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (2) TMI 384X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... also in the business of Air Taxi. For the assessment year 1995-96, the Assessing Officer interalia disallowed the claim of the assessee Company towards amortization of expenditure under Section 35D. The Assessing Officer further made an estimated disallowance of 10% of the general expenses. The Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs. 2,47,13,490/- towards interest expenditure and also made addition of Rs. 16.13 lakhs towards information processing charges. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT (Appeals) and the Appellate Authority allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved over the same, the Department filed an appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the App ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mployed in the business of the respondent, the excess shall be ignored for the purpose of computing the deduction allowable under sub-section (1) of Section 35D. The definition "capital employed in the business of the Company" as defined in explanation (b)(ii) to Section 35D(3) would apply to the case of the assessee. From the balance sheet of the Company, the capital of the Company is Rs. 6614.96 lakhs. The loan funds of the Company are not from ICICI or IFCI. Therefore, they cannot be taken into consideration. 2 ½% of Rs. 6614.96 lakhs comes to Rs. 165.37 lakhs. The respondent is eligible for a deduction of 10% (i.e.) Rs. 16.5 lakhs. The amount written off is Rs. 1,05,50,000/- and the Assessing Officer allowed Rs. 1,84,500/-. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Appeals) that the amount disallowed was paid to SITA (a society for airlines, telecommunication and information services) and the respondent being a member of SITA, had paid for the services rendered by them in respect of booking air tickets. The Tribunal having agreed to the findings on fact held that the nature of expenditure for availing of the services of SITA is not capital in nature. Further, the said expenditure is also not for acquiring any capital asset, but for availing services for better day-to-day business activities of the respondent. 9.From the above it is clear that the issues involved in the present appeal is only question of fact and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) have giv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
