Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (10) TMI 1050 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of claim of deduction under section 36(1)(viia) - CIT-A deleted the addition - Held that:- So far as the provision in respect of CRB Capital Market the assessee himself has added it back, alongwith the provision for other bad debts, in the computation of income. What has been claimed is deduction is as per the formulae set out in section 36(1)(viia) which provides for deduction of 10% of rural advances and 7.5% of gross total income, which works out to ₹ 86,,71,687 and ₹ 14,37,073 respectively, and thus aggregate to ₹ 1,01,08,760. As regards the Assessing Officer’s observations to the effect that since no provision is created for the bad debts, and that, for this reason, the same cannot be allowed as deduction, we find this aspect of the matter is now covered by the decision in the case of Power Finance Corporation Limited Vs JCIT [2006 (8) TMI 332 - ITAT DELHI] inasmuch as undisputedly the assessee has created a provision of ₹ 1,42,36,140 to the debit of reserve fund against the investment in CRB Capital Market, and the mere fact that it is termed as transfer to reserve does not alter substance of the provision because admittedly it is an above the line transfer and not below the line appropriation. In view of these discussions, as also bearing in mind entirety of the case, we uphold the relief granted by the CIT(A) and decline to interfere in the matter. - Decided against revenue Disallowance of provision on account of Government Securities - Held that:- this issue is covered, in favour of the assessee, by decision of a coordinate bench, in assessee’s own case for the immediately preceding assessment year. In this view of the matter, even as learned Departmental Representative, relied upon the stand taken in the order of the Assessing Officer, which has anyway been rejected by the coordinate bench in immediately preceding assessment year, we see no reasons to interfere in the relief granted by the CIT(A)in allowing the claim - Decided against revenue
|