TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 675
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the following substantial questions of law: (a) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal erred in holding that none of the incidental objects mentioned in the memorandum of associations can amount to the business of imparting education to students when the objects of the memorandum of the association of the assessee categorically states "to carryon the business of education and training in technical and other fields'. (b) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, tribunal erred in denying the bad debts written off as allowable deductions in view of the decision in TRF Ltd. Vs. CIT, 323 ITR 397? (c) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the tribunal erred in not taking into ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e thereupon filed an appeal before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who by an order dated 20.02.2015 dismissed the appeal preferred by the assessee. The assessee thereupon filed an appeal before Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal' for short). The tribunal by an order dated 11.09.2015 inter alia held that the object of the assessee is not one of imparting education and held that lending of loan to M/s PIE EDUCATION PVT. LTD. cannot be the object of the assessee and therefore, the loan cannot be held to be out of commercial expediency. Accordingly, the claim for deduction under Section 36(1)(vii) of the Act was disallowed. The tribunal further held that the issue pertaining to Section 115JAA of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....O, K.KOTESWARA RAO & CO.', 102 ITR 604, 'P.C.DHARMALINGA MUDALIAR VS. CIT', 152 ITR 588, 'NARAIN SWADESHI WEAVING MILLS VS. CEPT', 26 ITR 765, 'INDORE MALWA UNITED MILLS LTD. VS. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ORS', 55 ITR 736, 'BADRIDAS DAGA VS. CIT', 34 ITR 10, 'A.V.THOMAS & CO. LTD. VS. CIT', 48 ITR 67, 'ALL GROW FINANCE AND INVESTMENT P LTD. VS. CIT', 338 ITR 496, 'POYSHA OXYGEN (P) LTD VS. ACIT', 19 SOT 711, 'MOHAN MEAKIN LTD VS. CIT', 348 ITR 109, 'CIT VS. VIVEK ENGINEERING & CASTING LTD.', 383 ITR 480, 'CIT VS. SMT.PADMA S. BORA', (2015) 54 TAXMANN.COM 319, 'CIT VS. GILLANDERS ARBUTHNOT & CO LTD', 138 ITR 763. 5. On the other hand, learned ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce in this appeal under Section 260A of the Act. In support of aforesaid submissions, reliance has been placed on 'VIJAY KUMAR TALWAR VS. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX', 330 ITR 1 (SC), 'CIT VS. EPSILON ADVISERS (P.) LTD.', (2008) TAXMAN 332 (KAR). 6. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and have perused the record. From perusal of Clause 13 of the memorandum of Association, it is evident that one of the object's of the assessee is to lend money and the assessee has been engaged in money lending business since its inception from financial year 2004-05. The schedule of loans and advances is a continuing feature in all the past years and has been accepted by the department as part of bus....