What did the High Court hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the appeals, following its previous judgments on similar issues. The court found no substantial question of law arising from the Tribunal's decisions.

The appeals involved multiple assessment years and concerned additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowing loss on sale of repossessed assets and 50% of advertisement/business promotion expenses. The assessee had challenged these additions.

What were the issues?

Whether the Tribunal erred in deleting the addition on account of disallowing loss on sale of repossessed assets and disallowing 50% of advertisement and business promotion expenses.

CIT vs Maruti Countrywide Auto Financial… | Delhi High Court 2011

#L, #2 & #3 o/o L3.1 O. 20 1 1 Present: Mr. Sanjeev Sabharwal, Advocate for the Appellant. Ms. Madhavi Swaroop, Advocate for the Respondents. +ITA Nos. 1145-1147/2O11 * All these appeals are against the same assessee and pertain to 1 different periods. Out of these, in two appeals, two issues have been a raised and in one appeal only one of these issues arises, which are as under: - "In ITA No. 1t45l2OIL 1. Whether learned ITAT erred in deleting the addition of { 4,80,03,895/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowing the loss on sale of repossessed assets? 2. Whether learned ITAT erred in deleting the addition of T 3,L5,24,257/- made by Assessing officer on account of disallowing 50o/o of expenses incurred on advertisement and business promotions expenses. In ITA No. 1L46/2OLL 1. Whether learned ITAT erred in deleting the addition of { 5,00,59,438/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowing the loss on sale of repossessed assets? 2. Whether learned ITAT erred in deleting the addition of 7 2,I9,44,530/- made by Assessing officer on account of disallowing 50o/o of expenses incurred on advertisement and business promotions expenses. I 2011:DHC:12005

In ITA No. 1L4.Y/2O1't' 1. Whether learned ITAT of { 1,95 ,89 ,4655/- made account of disallowing the assets?" erred in deleting the addition by the Assessing Officer on loss on sale of repossessed a In so far as the first issue is concerned it had arisen in ITA No. 583/2011. The said appeal was dismissed on 23'd May, 2OL1 following the judgment dated gth November, 2010 in ITA No. L7I2/2010 & t7L4/2010 in the case titled as CIT vs. Citicorp Maruti Finance Ltd. In so far as the second Issue is concerned that has also been decided against the Revenue in ITA lrfo. 966/2009 in the case entitled as CIT v. Agro Beverages vide order, dated 19th November, 2}tt. Following those orders, these appeals are dismissed as no question of law arises. k0q SIDDHARTH MRIDUL, J. ocToBER 13, zOtL 'raj' ! G CHIEF JUSTICE 2011:DHC:12005

CIT vs. MARUTI COUNTRYWIDE AUTO FINANCIAL SERVICES PVT LTD

What did the High Court hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments