Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 1843 - ITAT JAIPURAddition on account of deposition of PF/ESI - contribution of employees beyond the prescribed time but before filing of the returns for respective assessment years - Held that:- The law on the issue stands settled that in case assessee deposits PF/ESI employees contribution before the due date of filing of return, it cannot be disallowed under section 36(1)(va). We have gone through the decision of the Tribunal inter-alia, therefore, by respectfully following the same specifically the Tribunal's order in assessee's own case, for A.Y. 2005-06, we confirm the impugned deletion and cannot allow ground No. (i) of the Revenue's appeal. Allowance of 80% depreciation on the complete structure of Wind Turbine Generator Machine (WTGM) - Held that:- Referring to decision rendered for A.Y. 2005-06 & 2006-07 in assessee's own case where depreciation on wind mill including civil construction and other allied activities has been allowed @ 80% without segregating the building and the plant. disallowance in Foreign Exchange resulting in speculation loss - Held that:- Where the foreign exchange contracts were only incidental to the assessee's regular course of business, these cannot be treated as disallowance in Foreign Exchange resulting in speculation loss. CIT Vs. Elecon Engineering Company Ltd. (2010 (2) TMI 23 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) Disallowance of expenses under section 14A - Held that:- As per Assessing Officer, making of investment, maintaining or continuing investment and time of exit from investment are well informed and well coordinate management decisions involving not only inputs from various sources but also acumen of senior management functionaries. Thus, the assessee incurred incidental expenditure like telephone, follow up etc. to earn the dividend income and such expenditure has been debited in the normal business expenses shown towards earning of taxable income. We have found from the record that the reasoning given to disallow this impugned amount has not been disputed specifically by stating that the assessee did not incur incidental expenditure like telephone etc. but it was argued that the assessee did not use borrowed funds on which interest had been paid and was nothing should be disallowed under section 14A of the Act.
|