2011 (2) TMI 1497

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ms. Padma Divakar, advocate for respondent. JUDGEMENT 1. Basically two questions are raised by the Appellant in this appeal. The same are as follows: 1. Whether the Tribunal was justified in upholding the disallowance of the interest of Rs. 78,72,653/- on the ground that the investment in impugned shares were made for gaining controlling interest in the Malaysian Company, TCLIM ? ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... was no dispute that investments in shares were made for the purpose of acquiring controlling interest therein, whereas, in the present case, the investments have been made for earning dividend. This aspect of the matter has not been considered by the Tribunal. 4. In this view of the matter both parties agree that this question also be remanded back to the Tribunal for de novo consideration. Ac....