Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2013 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (3) TMI 218 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of stock loss - FAA deleted the addition - Held that:- As per AO it is the case of less purchases whereas as per the assessee it is a case of receipt of less stock due to flood as 2600 MT of goods got washed away into the sea at Paradeep Port. Supplier had insurance with ICICI Lombard General Insurance who got Rs.1,45,77,724 & appellant had to bear loss of Rs.20,88,189. On carefully analyzing the impugned orders of both the authorities below in the light of the submissions of both the parties and considering the material made available to the Tribunal, it is found that both the authorities have not properly examined the issue in the light of facts on record and evidence produced by the assessee. Therefore set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A)and restore this issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication strictly following the principles of natural justice - in favour of revenue for statistical purposes. Addition u/s 40(a)(ia) - reimbursement of freight charges - CIT(A) deleted the said addition relying on the decision of DCIT v. Hasmukh J. Patel (2011 (3) TMI 353 - ITAT, AHMEDABAD)wherein held that where payment made by the assessee is nothing but reimbursement of freight charges for which necessary memos were issued by the shipping agent, Section 194C was not applicable - Held that:- The payments in question have been made by AERL and the assessee had only reimbursed the amount corresponding such payments. The CIT(A) has observed that the AO has not come out with any contrary finding on the claim of the assessee. Therefore, no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) duly supported by the decision of ITAT, Ahmedabad (supra) - in favour of assessee. Disallowance of electricity charges - CIT(A) deleted the disallowance - Held that:- The assessee claimed to have paid service connection fees deposited with Executive Engineer office at Jajpur. In the cases of CIT v. Excel Industries [1979 (10) TMI 68 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT], CIT v. Anand Gum Industries [1985 (4) TMI 58 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] and Sarabhai M Chemicals v. CIT [1980 (7) TMI 77 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] it is held service connection fee is a revenue expense as the advantage was not of an enduring nature. Thus no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) deleting the addition being the fees for service connection of electricity - in favour of assessee.
|