https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185049 The Tribunal allowed the appeal concerning the addition of Rs. 3,51,34,000, determining that section 41(1) was inapplicable as the loan write-back was a capital receipt, not a trading liability. This decision was distinguished from the SC judgment in T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd. due to differing transaction natures. Other issues regarding disallowances for doubtful debts, depreciation on scrapped assets, doubtful deposits, and expenses for share capital increase were not detailed, indicating they were resolved consistently with the Tribunal's primary decision. en-us Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 30 Nov 2023 12:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185049 The Tribunal allowed the appeal concerning the addition of Rs. 3,51,34,000, determining that section 41(1) was inapplicable as the loan write-back was a capital receipt, not a trading liability. This decision was distinguished from the SC judgment in T.V. Sundaram Iyengar & Sons Ltd. due to differing transaction natures. Other issues regarding disallowances for doubtful debts, depreciation on scrapped assets, doubtful deposits, and expenses for share capital increase were not detailed, indicating they were resolved consistently with the Tribunal's primary decision. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 15 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=185049