TMI Blog2012 (10) TMI 18X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eet Finance Ltd. an authorised FFMCs issued certificate of Rs 14.34 lacs to the assessee and the said certificate should be accepted as valid to allow deduction to the assessee u/s 80RR. However, the other certificate of Rs.2.4 lacs, is not in the name of the assessee but is in the name of assessee’s son and, therefore, the assessee cannot take benefit for deduction u/s 80RR in respect of same - Decided in favor of assessee restricting the claim of deduction u/s on the basis of the certificate issued by Wallstreet Finance Ltd. Dis-allowance u/s 14A of interest paid to bank on borrowings - nexus of interest payment to the income earned - investment in partnership firm - assessee has neither received interest income, remuneration from the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s are that the assessee is an individual and is a playback singer. He claimed that on account of services rendered as a singer, he has received remuneration in foreign currency to the equivalent of a sum of Rs. 56,75,311. The Assessing Officer has stated that two encashment certificates from Wallstreet Finance Ltd. for Rs. 14,34,600 and Rs. 2,40,000, were not in Form 10H. Therefore, the Assessing Officer denied the claim under section 80RR, inter alia, in respect of above two amounts. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority. 5. On behalf of the assessee, it was contended that the Reserve Bank of India (RBI) had issued circular by virtue of which the said finance company namely Wallstreet Finance L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bmitted that the RBI, vide its letter dated 16th June 2006, stated that certificate of encashment of foreign currency issued by FFNCs in Form ECF and not in Form 10H. He also referred to page 7 of the paper book which is a copy of RBI s letter dated 31st October 1998, addressed to various dealers in foreign exchange / FFMCs / restricted money changers, inter alia, confirming that encashment of foreign currency notes / travelers cheques, the certificate should be issued in Form no.ECF and not in Form 10H. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that Wallstreet Finance Ltd. is a FFMCs and, accordingly, the certificate issued for encashment of foreign currency is in order. Therefore, it is not justified to disallow deduction claimed und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot take benefit for deduction under section 80RR in respect of Rs. 2,40,000. Hence, we modify the orders of the authorities below by directing that the assessee be entitled for deduction under section 80RR, in respect of Rs. 14,34,600, and the same should be allowed subject to compliance of conditions of section 80RR of the Act. Hence, ground no.2, taken by the assessee is allowed in part restricting the claim of the assessee for deduction under section 80RR to Rs. 14,34,600, on the basis of the certificate issued by Wallstreet Finance Ltd. 10. In ground no.3, of the appeal, the assessee has disputed the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) in approving the action of the Assessing Officer to disallow interest paid to bank on borrow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the file of Assessing Officer as was done in the assessment year 2002 03. 13. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative submitted that the Assessing Officer as well as the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has disallowed the claim of interest after discussing the facts but in the earlier assessment year, the Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) as there was no discussion in the orders of the authorities below. The learned Counsel for the assessee could not controvert the above submissions of the learned Departmental Representative. 14. We have perused the order of the Tribunal for assessment year 2002 03 in ITA no.2942/Mum./2007, order dated 13th February 2008, copy placed at ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... observe that there is a withdrawal by way of cheque and no details have been given as to how much amount was contributed by assessee s wife for household expenses. Further, there is no dispute to the fact that there are no household expenses shown by the assessee in Profit Loss account filed by him. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and, accordingly, reject ground no.4, of the appeal taken by the assessee. 17. In grounds no.5 to 7, of the appeal, the assessee has disputed levy of interest charged under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. 18. Since charging of interest under the above sections is consequential, no specific ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
