TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Appeal on Tax Assessment Year 1998-1999 Allowed for Review</h1> <h3>PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA - I.</h3> PEERLESS GENERAL FINANCE & INVESTMENT CO Versus COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOLKATA - I. - TMI Issues involved:The judgment involves substantial questions of law related to the assessment year 1998-1999, including depreciation on long-term leasehold properties, disallowance of business expenditure, compliance with Reserve Bank of India's regulatory Directions, and plea for alternative relief regarding excess collection of processing charges.Depreciation on long-term leasehold properties:The Tribunal's decision to restrict depreciation only to capital expenditure for any structure by way of addition and/or alteration, rather than allowing depreciation in its entirety in respect of long-term leasehold properties, including perpetuity, is questioned.Disallowance of business expenditure:The Tribunal's affirmation of disallowance of liabilities for business expenditure amounting to &8377; 1,31,002 on the ground that they relate to an earlier previous year, despite the assessee receiving relevant bills during the next previous year, is challenged.Compliance with RBI's regulatory Directions:The issue revolves around whether the RBI's regulatory Directions mandating investment of surplus funds in specified securities preclude the disallowance of business expenditure under Section 14A of the I.T. Act, deeming it as incurred in relation to earning exempt dividend income, and whether the Proviso to that section precludes such disallowance.Plea for alternative relief regarding excess processing charges:The question arises as to whether the Tribunal should have directed alternative relief for the deferred liability of excess collection of processing charges, debited in the yearly account, to meet the contingency in case of success of the Revenue's appeal under Section 260A of the Act.The judgment admits an appeal on the substantial questions of law and directs the appellant to file the requisite number of paper books within two months after Christmas Vacation. Notice-of-Appeal is to be served upon the respondents by the concerned Department. The application is disposed of, and all parties are instructed to act on a photostat signed copy of the order.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
