2018 (4) TMI 804

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....87/Mds/2003 dated 13.10.2006 for the assessment year 1996-97. 3. The 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 Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in disallowing the expenditure incurred in connection with the share issue by the Appellant without considering the nature of expenditure and merely relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in Brooke Bond's case? 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in restricting the claim of depreciation and in not allowing the full amount of depreciation claimed by the appellant?" 4. The first question to be c....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....he assessee lacks bonafide. This is, on account of the dates and events, which had occurred in the transaction, pertaining to a machinery being a pollution control equipment. After considering the factual position the Tribunal has held as follows:- "10. From the assessee order, it clearly emerges that SRHSHL had fabricated this machinery by 22.7.94 whereas the same was sold to Veera Enterprises on 22.09.1995 and Veera Enterprises sold the Machinery to the assessee on 25.09.1995. Now the question is use between the period 22.07.1994 and 22.09.1995 and this aspect has not been verified by the AO. Though practically it seems that the machine must have been utilized because the Assessing Officer has clearly stated that the assessee could not ....