Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
1. The assessee, a public limited company, filed the return declaring a loss of Rs. 59,63,119 worked out in the following manner :"Net profit as per P & L A/c. 1,29,26,869Add : Items considered separately - Depreciation 37,760 -----------Add : Inadmissible expenses Donation 1,29,601 -----------Deferred Revenue expdr. 1,89,84,676 ----------- under section 37 1,90,57,349 ----------- Assessable Loss 59,63,119" ----------- As is evident from the details of the computation statement, the assessee claimed a sum of Rs. 1,89,84,676 as deferred revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer has stated that when the details were called for by him, it was represented to him that they were all public issue expenses and formed part of the total deferred revenue expenditure of Rs. 2,20,11,231 shown in the balance-sheet under Miscellaneous Expenditure. The Assessing Officer informed the assessee-company that the said expenditure of Rs. 1,89,84,676 was not allowable as public issue expenses being of ...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
1. This is a stay petition of the assessee arising out of the aforesaid appeals.2. The learned counsel for the assessee submitted that : the stay petition has become infructuous as the Department has collected the entire disputed tax. Hence, the stay petition may be treated as not pressed for disposal accordingly. In this connection, letter dated 10th July, 1998, from the assessee's counsel addressed to the Tribunal is also filed in support thereof.3. On the other hand, the learned representative for the Revenue had nothing to say in the matter.4. In the result, the stay petition of the assessee is dismissed as not pressed for vide my ex parte order 1. I have perused the order prepared by my learned brother. While agreeing with the conclusion of my learned brother I would like to place the facts of this case in the order because I feel great injustice has been done with the assessee without any fault on its part by fixing the stay petition on 27th July, 1998, while the application for...
Tag this Judgment!Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Madras
1. This appeal is filed by the assessee before this Tribunal on 20th October, 1997 challenging the order dt. 30th September, 1997 passed under s. 144 r/w s. 158BC/158BD computing undisclosed income at Rs. 9,60,84,250 raising a tax demand at 60 per cent at Rs. 5,76,50,550.During the pendency of the appeal petition under r. 35A of ITAT Rules, 1963 was filed on 11th February, 1998 praying for stay of demand (which we have recorded above) till the disposal of the appeal.2. The stay petition was posted for hearing on several occasions and at one of the hearings, the Senior Departmental Representative, J. Suresh, submitted that the appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable and has to be dismissed in limine for failure to pay the tax on the admitted returned undisclosed income of Rs. 18,04,100 on which admitted tax worked out to Rs. 9,52,460 which was not paid by the appellant-assessee along with the returned income or even till date.The Senior Departmental Representative pleaded that...
Tag this Judgment!