9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (10) TMI 61X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... C. S. P. SINGH J.--The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench D has referred the following three questions for our opinion : " 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the amounts of Rs. 93,638, Rs. 1,00,936 and Rs. 53,168 payable by the assessee as interest under section 3(3) of the U. P. Sugarcane (Purchase Tax) Act, 1961, for the assessment years 1967-68, 1968-69 an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6 ITR 387, wherein it has been held that payments of the nature made, which are the subject-matter of the first and the third questions are not allowable deductions. So far as the second question is concerned that also appears to be covered by the decision of this court in the case of L. H. Sugar Factories Oil Mills (P.) Ltd. v. CIT [1979] 118 ITR 985 and the two other decisions in the case of t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee, yet it was given by the directors as per usual requirement of the bank, as, in case the guarantee had not been given, the assessee would not have been able to secure the loan from the bank. From the finding recorded by the Tribunal, it is clear that the bank would not have advanced the loan in case the directors had not stood security for the payment. This being so, the case cannot be d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
