Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (6) TMI 349 - AT - Income TaxUnutilized CENVAT credit balance – A.O. has treated it as revenue receipt - Held that:- Following CIT Vs Unique Industries [2008 (5) TMI 238 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - The assessee treated it as an advance payment of excise duty paid on purchases of raw materials, consumables and capital goods - AO has treated it as revenue receipt but the issue is now fully covered in favour of the assessee - when the purchases are accounted for and debited to P & L account net of such excise duty paid on purchases, MODVAT/CENVAT credit received by the assessee already stand included in the profits of the assessee by way of reduction in purchase price debited to P & L account, thus, it cannot be added again – the order of the CIT(A) cannot be interfered – Decided against Revenue. Deletion of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) of the Act – Disallowance of excess claim of depreciation - Held that:- Penalty was also deleted by CIT(A) the disallowance of deduction u/s 10B which was deleted – Revenue could not point out as to how it is not applicable to the facts of the present case – thus, there was no reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A) in respect of deletion of penalty in respect of any of these three additions/disallowances - on the date of filing of return of income for AY 2005-06, there was no disallowance or addition in AY 2004-05 and the same has happened on 24.12.2006 due to which the brought forward depreciation was reduced – the claim of assessee for brought forward unabsorbed depreciation from the AY 2004- 05, penalty is not justified – thus, there was no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) – Decided against Revenue.
|