2013 (11) TMI 574

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... are disposed of by this common order. 2. Tax Appeal No. 203/2013 is preferred by the revenue against the impugned judgment and order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 84/2007 with respect to the Assessment Year 2003-04. 2.1 Tax Appeal No. 205/2013 is preferred by the revenue against the impugned judgment and order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 1468/2007 with respect to the Assessment Year 2004-05. 2.2 Tax Appeal No. 206/2013 is preferred by the revenue against the impugned judgment and order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 3578/2008 with respect to the Assessment Year 2005-06. 2.3 Tax Appeal No. 207/2013 is preferred by the revenue against the impugned judgmen....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....reciation of sale and lease back assets. It is required to be noted that the contention on behalf of the assessee with respect to Section 37(1) of the Income Tax Act is an alternative submission, if their contention with respect to Section 35E is not accepted. 4. It is reported that question no. 2 i.e. disallowance of depreciation of sale and lease back assets has a direct connection with respect to question of law proposed by the revenue in their respective appeals i.e. Tax Appeal Nos. 203/2013, 205/2013, 206/2013 and 207/2013. 5. Shri S.N. Divetia, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee in Tax Appeal Nos. 209/2013, 211/2013, 213/2013 and 215/2013 has vehemently submitted that the tribunal in the impugned order has note....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nue has submitted that if this Court is inclined to remand the appeals to the tribunal to consider the aforesaid questions, their appeals, being Tax Appeal Nos. 203/2013, 205/2013, 206/2013 and 207/2013, are also required to be remanded to the tribunal to consider the question of law with respect to excluding the principal sum of lease rent. 8. To the aforesaid Shri Divetia, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the assessee has stated at the bar that he has no objection if the appeals preferred by the revenue to consider the aforesaid questions are remanded to the tribunal. 9. Thus, there is a broad consensus between the learned advocates appearing on behalf of the respective parties i.e. the assessee and the revenue to remand the ....