2025 (2) TMI 243

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....n order to recompute the book-profit under section 115JB, certified by the tax auditor in Form No. 29B as per Rule 40B of Income Tax Rules, 1962, in circumstances where audited accounts are prepared in accordance with Companies Act, 2013, duly certified by a Chartered Accountant, approved by the shareholders in the annual general meeting in accordance with law, in light of the settled legal position in Appollo Tyres Ltd V. CIT (2002) 255 ITR 273 (SC)? ii. Whether foreclosure costs paid for early redemption of preference shares are analogous to pre-payment charges levied by banks/financial institution/lenders on settlement of loans and borrowings, and therefore qualify as capital expenditure of revenue expenditure? iv. Whet....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....thna, by referring to the balance sheet for the year ended 31 March 2024, points out that the Appellant is a lossmaking company, and this aspect is also relevant when considering the issue of interim relief. She pointed out that the Appellant had already deposited Rs.5 Crores according to the tribunal's directions. 6. Ms Sethna also pointed out that the Appellant has filed a rectification application. If allowed, this would reduce the tax demand from Rs. 82,47,79,075/-to Rs. 68,91,84,604/- [including the Rs. 5 crores already paid]. She submitted that the order-giving effect contains a clear error. 7. Mr Mohanty learned Counsel for the Respondent opposes any the grant of any interim relief. He submits that the appellant admitted to....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....facts. 12. The arguments based on high-pitched assessment, CBDT circulars and the decisions relied upon in that regard were mainly in the context of the first appeal against the assessment order. Today, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has decided the matter, confirming the demands. 13. In such matters, the usual rule would be a deposit of the entire demanded amount. However, since the rectification application is pending and Ms Sethna has urged that if the same is allowed, the tax liability will be reduced to Rs. 68.91 Crores, some departure can be made from this usual rule. But no case is made out for an unconditional stay. 14. The circumstance that the Appellant is a loss-making company is based upon the balance sheet for the y....