9911796707
TMI Blog2003 (3) TMI 263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th Jan., 1997, for asst. yr. 1992-93. 2. Ground No. 1 is not pressed by the learned counsel of the assessee, hence dismissed. 3. Ground of appeal No. 2 reads as under: "CIT(A) erred in upholding the disallowance of Rs. 8,66,989 under s. 32AB of the IT Act in respect of unserviceable and unusable JCB excavator loader scrapped during the accounting year and the scrap value deducted from the bl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, has to be allowed as a deduction. The learned counsel argued that the Revenue authorities have taken a narrow interpretation of the whole issue. 5. The learned Departmental Representative argued that in accordance with the provisions of law, the asset purchased has to be used for eight years and if sold prior to that it has to be taxed. He argued that the plea of substitution of old loade ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... set with a new one within a period of eight years in order to get investment relief. The provision of law is to be interpreted in accordance with its substance and purpose of the provision, and any interpretation so as to defeat the very purpose of the enactment should be avoided. The plea of the learned Departmental Representative that the plea of substitution of unserviceable asset was not taken ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tative argued that no delivery was taken or given in this case and, therefore, has been rightly held as speculation loss. 9. We have considered the rival submissions. We find that no payment was made in respect of purchase price of these shares and admittedly no delivery of shares was taken by the assessee. In these facts and in the absence of any material before us to contradict the findings of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
