https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16658 The court ruled in favor of the assessee for Issue 1, stating that the excess collection made by the assessee should not be included in computing income for the assessment year 1974-75. However, for Issue 2, the court held that "borrowed capital" should not be deducted from the capital for the purpose of relief under section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in line with the Supreme Court precedent in Lohia Machines Ltd. v. Union of India [1985] 152 ITR 308. en-us Mon, 27 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 09 Sep 2009 12:18:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16658 The court ruled in favor of the assessee for Issue 1, stating that the excess collection made by the assessee should not be included in computing income for the assessment year 1974-75. However, for Issue 2, the court held that "borrowed capital" should not be deducted from the capital for the purpose of relief under section 80J of the Income-tax Act, 1961, in line with the Supreme Court precedent in Lohia Machines Ltd. v. Union of India [1985] 152 ITR 308. Case-Laws Income Tax Mon, 27 Jan 1997 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=16658