https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69436 The Tribunal found that the lease transactions were sham, disallowing depreciation but directing exclusion of lease income. The amount received from DLWL was deemed income, not an advance, and the addition was upheld. The first issue was partly allowed, and the second issue was dismissed. en-us Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 17 Jul 2012 17:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69436 The Tribunal found that the lease transactions were sham, disallowing depreciation but directing exclusion of lease income. The amount received from DLWL was deemed income, not an advance, and the addition was upheld. The first issue was partly allowed, and the second issue was dismissed. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 24 Mar 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=69436