Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (1) TMI 89 - ITAT CHENNAIDisallowance of foreign exchange fluctuation under the head finance cost - CIT-A held that in the absence of applicability of section 43A to the foreign exchange loss arising out of foreign currency loans for acquisition of indigenous assets, the claim of exchange fluctuation loss in revenue account by assessee is in accordance with generally accepted accounting practices and mandatory accounting standards notified by ICAI and also in conformity with CBDT notification cannot be faulted - HELD THAT:- Tribunal in the case of M/s.Hyundai Motor Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2017 (4) TMI 1193 - ITAT CHENNAI] where the Tribunal considering ratio laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of CIT vs. Tata Iron & Steel Co.Ltd. [1997 (12) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT] and M/S WOODWARD GOVERNOR INDIA P. LTD [2009 (4) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT] held that in absence of applicability of section 43A and in the absence of any other provision of the Income Tax Act dealing with the issue of forex loss, the claim of exchange fluctuation loss taken by the assessee cannot be treated as capital in nature and added back to cost of assets. Thus we are of the considered view that there is no error in the findings recorded by the learned CIT(A) that in absence of applicability of section 43A of the Act, loss claimed by the assessee on account of exchange fluctuation loss on ECB loan availed for acquisition of indigenous assets revenue in nature deductible u/s.37(1) of the Act cannot be considered as capital in nature and added back to the cost of assets. Hence, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the learned CIT(A) and reject the grounds taken by the Revenue for both the assessment years. Admission of additional claim made by the assessee - Disallowance of deduction against interest expenses which was voluntarily added in the statement of total income - HELD THAT:- The failure to advert to claim in original return or revised return cannot denude the appellate authorities of their power to consider their claim, if the relevant materials available on record and the claim is otherwise tenable in law. The learned CIT(A) after considering case of M/s. Goetz (India) Ltd Vs. CIT [2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT] and the decision of CIT vs Abhinitha Foundation Pvt Ltd [2017 (6) TMI 604 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] has rightly admitted the additional claim made by the assessee regarding deduction for interest expenditure on forex loan and remitted the issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer for verification of facts to decide in accordance with law. We do not find any error or infirmity in the findings recorded by the learned CIT(A) and hence, we are inclined to uphold the findings of the learned CIT(A) and reject the grounds taken by the Revenue.
|