TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 626X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... missioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [2006 (12) TMI 82 - SUPREME COURT] followed - CIT (A) has deleted the addition after giving a finding that interest free advances to subsidiary companies have been given on commercial expediency and no disallowance could therefore be made - the order of the CIT (A) is fair and reasonable and it does not call for any interference – Decided against Revenue. Liability of advertisement expenses as FBT u/s 115WD of the Act – Held that:- Assessee contended that there is couple of issues raised in the ground and the first issue relates to taxability of development expenditure as FB and the second one being the bus hire charges incurred for the purpose of transporting the employees to the premises of the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed the following grounds which read as under: 1. The Ld CIT (A) erred in upholding the order of the AO treating loss of Rs. 1,95,04,886/- arising on cancellation of Forward Exchange Contracts as Speculation Loss . It is submitted that the appellant is recognized export house. In order to hedge the currency fluctuation, the appellant has entered into the Forward Exchange Contracts. The loss arising on cancellation of such Forward Exchange Contract is a part and parcel of the business of the company and as such cannot be treated as a Speculation Loss . The conclusion arrived at by the AO and the Ld CIT (A) is erroneous and contrary to the facts and the law. 2. The Ld CIT (A) erred in not adjudicating and deciding the Ground 1(c) i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) Pvt. Ltd. vide ITA No. 6169/M/2012, dated 11.10.2013, the assessee has a case to win in his favour. Further, Ld Counsel fairly mentioned that this ground may be remanded to the files of the AO for adjudicating the same in the light of the said orders of the Tribunal as well as the binding judgment of the Hon ble High Court in the case of Badridas Gauridu (P) Ltd (supra). 4. On the other hand, Ld DR has no objection for the said proposal of the Ld AR for remanding the matter to the files of the AO. 5. On hearing both the parties, we are of the considered opinion that ground no.1 should be remanded to the files of the AO for adjudicating the issue afresh in the light of the said judgment of the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rsion of interest bearing funds for providing interest free loans to subsidy companies, without appreciating the facts of the case. 11. At the outset, referring the ground raised by the Revenue, Ld Counsel for the assessee mentioned that identical issue was decided by the CIT (A) in favour of the assessee by following the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of S. A. Builders Ltd. Vs Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) (SC) 288 ITR 1 and para 5.5 of the impugned order is relevant in this regard. In fact, the CIT (A) followed the orders of his predecessor for the earlier AYs 2004-05 and 2006-2007 while giving the relief to the assessee. In this regard, Ld Counsel filed a copies of the orders of the Tribunal for the for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the judgments are squarely applicable to the facts of the present case. 13. On the other hand, Ld DR relied on the orders of the Revenue Authorities. 14. We have heard both the parties and peruse the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as the decisions cited by the Ld Counsel. On hearing both the parties, we find merit in the submissions of the assessee. Considering the contents of para 5 of the CIT (A) s order, which is cemented by the orders of the Tribunal in the AY 2004-05 and 2006-07, we are of the opinion that the order of the CIT (A) is fair and reasonable and it does not call for any interference. Accordingly, ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 15. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. ITA No.9 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of transporting the employees to the premises of the assessee. He mentioned that both the issues should be remanded to the files of the AO for adjudicating the issues afresh in the light of the CBDT Circular No.8/2005, dated 29.8.2005. In connection with advertisement / product marketing research expenses being the first issue, Ld Counsel brought our attention to Question No.62 of the said Circular and mentioned that the expenditure of this kind incurred for product marketing research expenses being in the nature of expenditure for the purpose of testing the efficacy of the product, does not attract provisions of FBT. 19. On the other hand, Ld DR relied on the orders of the Revenue Authorities. 20. We have heard both the parties an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
