Just a moment...

Top
Help
AI Drafter

Generate professional replies to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter.

Step 1 – Issue Identification & Review

The AI analyses your query, notice, order, or uploaded documents and identifies the key issues involved.

• Review the issues identified by the AI
• Add, edit, remove, or refine issues as required


Step 2 – Draft Generation

Once you approve the issues, the AI performs issue-wise legal research and prepares a structured draft response.

• Relevant statutory provisions
• Judicial precedents and Supreme Court, High Court and other citations
• Issue-wise legal analysis
• Practical arguments and supporting content
• Professionally structured draft ready for further review.

Try Now
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / RSS

2017 (5) TMI 1767

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....of the case are that the respondent-assessee is a company incorporated under the provisions of the Companies Act. It is engaged in non-banking business. Return of income for the assessment year 1998-99 was filed on 30/11/1998 declaring a total income of Rs. 73,78,590/-. The said return of income was revised at a loss of Rs. 15,86,75,345/-. Against said return of income, assessment was originally completed u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ['the Act' for short] vide order dated 30/03/2001 determining the total loss at Rs. 1,13,04,163/- and assessed the book profits u/s 115JA of the Act. The AO added back lease equalisation charges of Rs. 11,09,04,763/- to the book profits for the purpose of determining tax liability u/s 115JA of the Act....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the revenue is in appeal before us in the present appeal. The revenue raised the following identical grounds of appeal for assessment years 1998-99 to 2000-01: 7. During the course of hearing of the appeals, learned DR vehemently contended that the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka has set aside the matter to the assessing authority accepting the contention of the learned counsel for assessee that lease equalization charges is nothing but diminution in the value of assets. Therefore, nature of the issue is not open for inquiry or consideration before the assessing authority. The assessing authority is bound to examine whether diminution in the value of assets can be added back to book profits for the purpose of computing tax liability u/s....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....15JA of the Act. The Hon'ble High Court has framed the following question of law as regards lease equalization charges: "1. Whether the Appellate Authorities were correct in holding that the provision for non-performing assets and lease equalization fund cannot be added back to the book profits as per explanation to section 115JA(2) of the Act. The said question was answered by the Hon'ble High Court as follows: "8. Insofar as the second substantial question of law is concerned, that was also a subject matter of the appeal in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Weizmann Homes reported in (2013) 357 ITR 74 (Karn) wherein, it was held that by Finance Act No.2 of 2009 with effect from 01.04.1998, the Clause (g) ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Indian railway Finance Corporation Ltd. (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the present case as in that decision, it is not admitted that provision for lease equalisation charges is nothing but diminution in the value of assets. Therefore, the CIT(A) ought not to have allowed the claim of the assessee without examining the order of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in detail. Therefore, the orders of the CIT(A) are reversed. 10. In the result, the appeals filed by the revenue are allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 2nd May, 2017 ============= Document 1 1. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is against law & facts of the case. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing assessee's c....