9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (8) TMI 346X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r which a sum of Rs. 10,00,000 is paid as deposit and it is also paying rentals payable to the owner of the equipments – held that - It is no doubt true that the assessee has paid the deposit of Rs. 10,00,000 which has to be adjusted towards the rentals. When such being the case, we are of the opinion that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was justified in reversing the findings of the Asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch in I. T. A. No. 458/Bang/2000 dated October 29, 2001, raising the following substantial question of law: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the payment to the Bangalore Cancer Research Foundation of Rs. 3 lakhs in the year of account was for purchase of the equipment and not for the user of the same ?" 2. The facts of this case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... confirmed the order passed by the Assessing Officer. Against the order of the Tribunal, the present appeal is filed. 4. Having heard the counsel for the parties, we notice the following undisputed facts. 5. The equipments are not owned by the assessee. It is hired by the assessee. When the assessee is only a lessee and has paid lease charges, such expenses cannot be treated as capital in nature ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
