Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (9) TMI 1600 - AT - Income TaxPayment of cess on green leaf - whether production of green leaf which is 100% agricultural activity and not an admissible deduction under income chargeable ? - Held that:- We find that the issue under dispute is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in favour of the assessee in the case of CIT vs. APEEJAY Tea Co. Ltd. [2015 (8) TMI 1260 - SUPREME COURT] as held Expenditure on cess should be allowed as a deduction before computing the composite income under Rule 8 and the apportionment is to be made after the income is so computed. Disallowance of depreciation on assets acquiring with NABARD fund - Held that:- As relying on decision of assessee’s own case we find force in the arguments made by the learned Counsel on behalf of the respondent assessee and we very much appreciate the conclusion arrived at by the Ld. CIT(A) while deleting the addition. Going through the provisions of law and appreciating the Scheme of NABARD the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly allowed the depreciation on the assets purchased from out of withdrawal of NABARD fund. We, therefore, uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the Revenue’s appeal Disallowance of loss incurred on instant tea - CIT(A) allowing the loss incurred on instant tea export to be set off from the business income as arrived at after application of Rule 8 - assessee had only sought for rectification of a particular claim vide its letter dated 21.12.2005 before finalization of computing of total income of the assessee - Held that:- In the instant case, the time limit for filing revised return u/s 139(5) of the Act had already expired and in view of fact the assessee is only seeking to rectify the particular claim already made in the return, there is no need to make such a claim only by way of revised return. It is enough if the same is made by way of a letter filed duly before the Ld. AO. We find that the assessee had brought to the attention of the Ld. AO vide its letter dated 21.12.2005 seeking for rectification of aforesaid mistakes committed by it in the return. This is evident from the copy of the said letter dated 21.12.2005 which is placed on record before us. We find that the Ld. AO had considered the other mistakes pointed out by the assessee while completing the assessment, but had omitted to consider the rectification pleaded on account of loss on instant tea amounting to ₹ 55,85,622/- alone. No infirmity in the direction given by the Ld. CIT(A) to the ld. AO to consider the instant tea loss of ₹ 55,85,622/- to the computation of composite income and correspondingly exclude the same from the business income computing after application of Rule 8(1) of the Rules Revenue appeal dismissed.
|