2001 (9) TMI 87

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., the assessee filed an appeal. It was dismissed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) vide order dated March 3, 1992. The assessee filed a second appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated June 29, 2000, the appeal was accepted. Aggrieved by the order of the Tribunal, the Revenue has filed the present appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. It maintains that the following question of law arises for conside ration of this court: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in allowing the claim of the assessee as interest receivable from sister concern and written off as irrecoverable being a sick unit without exhausting all efforts?" We hav....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8 lakhs and the principal amount of Rs.67 lakhs". On this basis, it has come to a firm finding of fact that the decision to 'waive the interest was taken by the assessee to safeguard its share capital of Rs.48 lakhs and the loan of Rs.67 lakhs, for which equal contribution was made by the assessee's collaborators". On this basis, the deduction was allowed. On a perusal of the findings recorded by the Tribunal, we hold that the deduction was rightly allowed. Mr. Sawhney contends that there was no evidence before the Tribunal to support the abovenoted finding. However, despite being asked, learned counsel for the Revenue is unable to refer to even an averment in the petition of appeal that the Tribunal had recorded the abovenoted findin....