TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (10) TMI 29
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 2. The learned counsel for the revenue challenged the said order of the Tribunal on four issues. The first issue was with relation to the deletion of the addition of Rs. 33 lacs, which had been made by the Assessing Officer on account of unexplained share capital under Section 68 of the said Act. The second issue pertains to the deletion made by the Tribunal of the addition of Rs 35,06,292/-by the Assessing Officer on account of alleged unexplained security deposits under Section 68 of the said Act. The third issue relates to the disallowance of depreciation by the Assessing Officer amounting to Rs.15 lacs in respect of cast iron moulds. The disallowance has been set aside and the Tribunal has allowed the said depreciation. The fourth is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....iled before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The amounts received from these shareholders were through cheques, which had been duly credited in the bank account of the assessee and these shareholders were also income tax assessees, who had also received dividends in respect of the shares. It was also noted that the assessee company had also filed tax deducted at source certificates along with bank statements to show the evidence of remittance of dividend. As regards the remaining shareholder, that is, Dr. S. P. Srivastava, it was noted that he was an NRI and the share capital of Rs 15 lacs received from him was through his NRE account maintained in ANZ Grindlaya Bank. The remittances were through three separate cheques, of which de....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nce or lease any vehicle or plant or machinery from the assessee. The security deposits were either eventually refunded or adjusted against sale of the assets to the customers upon termination of the lease. The agreements which were entered into between the assessee and its customers, contained the period of lease, security deposit received, rate of interest, descriptions of the assets etc. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) noted that the assessee company had more than 1500 such customers from whom security deposits had been received and to whom assets had been leased as on 31.03.1994. Taking of security deposits from the customers was regarded as mandatory for the business as it provides a safety net and thus minimizes the risk of a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nstalments with effect from 29.04.1994. Both the Commissioner Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Tribunal have concluded that the fact that the lease payments were to commence on 29.04.19994 did not make any difference to the fact that the lease, in fact, had commenced on 29.03.1994. Moreover, bills in respect of the cast iron moulds were dated 29.03.1994. The delivery challans were also prior to 31.03.1994. The Tribunal concluded that on the basis of these documents as also on the basis of the certificate given by the lessee (Shiva Glass Works Ltd), it was established that the cast iron moulds were put to use in the month of March, 1994 and, therefore, the depreciation was allowable in the year in question. This is also a finding of fa....