TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (8) TMI 612
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in upholding the deletion of the addition of Rs. 1,19,81,900/- on account of interest on loan given to M/s A.P. Rayons Ltd.? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in upholding the deletion of the addition of Rs. 56,75,046/- on account of withholding of tax in respect of technical services rendered to foreign Company ? (3) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in upholding the deletion of the addition of Rs. 6,93,176/- on account of payment made to various Institutions/Schools? (4) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....easons indicated in our order dated 13.07.2017 in ITR No.4/1996, this substantial question of law is answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the respondent-assessee and against the appellant-revenue. 6. Regarding question no.(4): (a) The impugned order of the Tribunal has upheld the order of the CIT (Appeals) which directed the Assessing Officer to allow the depreciation on increased value of assets being unabsorbed depreciation of the amalgamating company JG Glass Ltd. which had amalgamated into the respondentassessee. The impugned order while upholding the order of the CIT (Appeals) placed reliance upon its order dated 29.03.1996 passed in respect of the same respondentassessee for the assessment year 1989-90 in ITA No.397- Nag/94....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....187 ITR 1 holds good even after the insertion of clause (c) and substitution of explanation (2) below section 43(6) by the Taxation Law (Amendment Act, 1986?" (d) This Court by its order dated 10.07.2017 disposed of ITR No. 39/1998 by answering question No.(1) in ITR No. 39/98 as reproduced hereinabove in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the respondent-assessee and against the appellant-revenue i.e. the exercise of power under Section 263 of the Act by the Commissioner was not called for. In the above view, the other questions which were on merits of the claim for inclusion of unabsorbed depreciation in the value assets belonging to amalgamating company at the time of amalgamation was not considered. In the above circumstances, the order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....to income from profits and gains of business or profession: 43. In sections 28 to 41 and in this section, unless the context otherwise requires- (1) to (5) ........... (6) "Written down value means- (a) ....... (b) ....... (c) in the case of any block of assets- (i) In respect of any previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on the 1st day of April, 1988, the aggregate of the written down value of the assets falling within that block of assets at the beginning of the previous yar and adjusted- (A) by the increase by the actual cost of any asset falling within that block, acquired during the previous year; (B) by the reduction of the moneys payable in respect of any asset falling within that block, which is s....