2015 (9) TMI 913

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....umar JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by V. Ramasubramanian, J. ) This Tax Case Appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- (1) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal was right in law in holding that the appellant is not entitled to deduction of the provision made in respect of Non Performing Assets which are considered....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ned counsel appearing for the appellant and Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Standing Counsel for the respondent. 3. The learned counsel for the appellant conceded that questions of law 1 and 2 are covered against the assessee by the judgment of the Supreme Court in SOUTHERN TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED v. JOINT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ((2010) 320 ITR 577). Accordingly, questions 1 and 2 are disposed of. 4. I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s open to the appellant to take advantage of the finding of the Tribunal. 5. Insofar as question No.3 is concerned, the case of the appellant is that it has a non-banking finance Company which is engaged in the purchase and leasing of commercial vehicles. According to the learned counsel for the appellant, the benefit of higher rate of depreciation under the third proviso to section 34(1) is avai....