Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 592 - ITAT AHMEDABADAddition on account of diversion of interest bearing funds - HELD THAT:- Undoubtedly, the own interest free funds of the assessee exceeds the amount of interest free advances, therefore, we are of the view that no disallowance of interest expenses on account of diversion of the fund is warranted. See RELIANCE UTILITIES & POWER LTD. [2009 (1) TMI 4 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - thus we hold that no disallowance of interest expense claimed by the assessee can be made on account of loans and advances - Decided in favour of assessee Nature of expenses - Information Technology Expenses - revenue or capital expenditures - HELD THAT:- AO in his assessment order has recorded the findings that the assessee has not furnished the supporting evidences to justify the disputed expenditure as revenue in nature. However, we find that the disallowance have been made by the AO treting the same as capital in nature. Thus, it is implied that the AO has not doubted on the genuineness of the expenses claimed by the assessee. Had the AO been doubted on the genuineness of the expenses claimed by the assessee, then he would have disallowed the entire expenditure. But he has not done so. Now the controversy arises whether the expenditure claimed by the assessee representing the capital expenditure which are eligible for depreciation. It is the admitted fact that there was no allegation of the revenue to the effect that some asset came into existence out of such expenditure. Further more, we find that major expenses were incurred by the assessee in the name of three parties which were providing services to the assessee as discussed above. On perusal of the same expenses, we find that these expenditure are incurred in routine and therefore no benefit of enduring nature is arising. Similarly, we also note that the expenses incurred on IT consumables are also routine expenses which doesn not bring any fixed asset into existence. See NJ. INDIA INVEST (P.) LTD. [2013 (7) TMI 738 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - HELD THAT:- As own fund of the assessee exceeds the amount of investment. This fact was also not disputed by the Ld. DR appearing for the Revenue. Accordingly we presume that the investment was made by the assessee out of its own fund. In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd [2009 (1) TMI 4 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - no disallowance of interest expense claimed by the assessee can be made on account of investment as discussed above. Hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT-A. Addition representing the income as shown in the TDS certificate - certain entries in the form 26AS showing the TDS deducted by several parties only which was not claim by the assessee in its income tax return - HELD THAT:- Admittedly, there is no change in the rate of tax for the year under consideration vis-a-vis in the subsequent assessment year. Therefore even the income pertaining to the year under consideration has been offered to tax in the subsequent assessment year there is no loss to the revenue and therefore no addition can be made. In holding so we find support and guidance from judgment of Hon’ble S.C. in the case of CIT vs Excel Industries [2013 (10) TMI 324 - SUPREME COURT]. Disallowance u/s.36(1)(va) on account of late payment of Employee’s contribution of PF - HELD THAT:- Assessee is not eligible for deduction on account of late payment of employees Contributiuon by the order of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT versus GSRTC [2014 (1) TMI 502 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT].
|