Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2011 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2011 (7) TMI 302 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance - Deduction u/s.80-IA - appellant had executed a works contract in respect of each of the projects for which it has claimed a deduction u/s.80IA(4) of the Act - Appellant has been unable to establish as to how did it make an investment in the project, part from not being able to prove that it had not executed a works contract as is evident above - there is no dispute about the fact that as the law stands now in the light of retrospective insertion of Explanation below to Section 80IA(13), the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4). Deduction - Bonus paid to employees - It was submitted that the company had distributed the bonus before filing the return and before filing the tax audit report but what is disallowable under section 43B is unpaid bonus and not unclaimed bonus. The submissions of the assessee was that the amount of ₹ 4,73,084 represents the amount which the assessee has offered to pay but which the employees have not claimed - the test of disallowing of bonus under section 43B is whether the amount has been paid or not, and the reasons for non payment are immaterial - Decided against the assessee. Repairs and maintenance expenditure - expenses are clearly in the nature of current repairs inasmuch as even though some replacements are needed but replacements are of the consumable which have limited span of life - The claim of the assessee deserves to be allowed as in the nature of current repairs - find support from the judgment of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Hede Consultancy Pvt. Ltd.[2002 (6) TMI 19 - BOMBAY High Court], wherein, it has been held that "since the assets created by spending the said amounts did not belong to the assessee but the assessee got the business advantage of using modern business premises at a low rent, thus saving considerable revenue expenditure for a considerably long period, the expenditure should be looked upon as revenue expenditure" - Decided in favour of assessee. Bad debts - Amounts which have been disallowed as bad debt represents the amounts written off in respect of certain deposits, etc. - This claim, is not permissible as bad debt for the elementary reason, as rightly noted by the authorities below, that the related amount has not been included as income in any one of the earlier previous years - To that extent, the stand of the authorities below is quite justified and does not call for any interference. However, none of the authorities below have examined whether the amounts so written off qualify for deduction as a business loss - Therefore, remit the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication in this light after giving proper hearing to the assessee.
|