Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 530 - AT - Income TaxRestriction of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act Compliance of Rule 8D not made - Held that:- It is an undisputed fact that the revised working based on which CIT(A) had reduced the disallowance and thereby granted relief to the Assessee was not furnished by Assessee before AO nor any report on the alternate working of disallowance was obtained during appellate proceedings by CIT(A) from AO in view of all fairness and to meet the ends of justice, the AO should be granted an opportunity to examine the working of disallowance u/s. 14A which has been accepted by CIT(A) thus, the matter remitted back to the AO for verification Decided partly in favour of Revenue. Deletion of disallowance u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act Held that:- The CIT(A) while deleting the addition has noted that the Assessee had clamed the expenditure u/s 37of the Act and not as bad debts u/s 36(1)(vii) of the Act - CIT(A) has further given a finding that that 1/5 of the expenses as claimed by the Assessee was allowable u/s. 37 of the Act - Revenue could not controvert the findings of CIT(A) nor has brought on record any contrary material in its support - the Revenue is contesting the disallowance u/s. 36(1)(vii) and not the deduction u/s. 37 of the Act thus, there is no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) Decided against Revenue. Deletion on account of loss on sale of property Held that:- CIT(A) while deleting the addition has noted that Assessee had submitted sufficient documentary evidences and explanation before the AO but A.O. had ignored and over looked - CIT(A) has further accepted the submissions of the Assessee that the property sold was kept as investment, it was given on rent in earlier years, the income from rentals from the property has been offered to tax under the head "income from house property" and no depreciation has been claimed on the property which was sold during the year - the treatment of sale consideration of property was in conformity with the provisions of Section 45 of the Act and had accordingly directed the A.O to work out the capital gain/loss under the head "capital gains" during the year - the Revenue could not controvert the findings of CIT(A), nor has brought any contrary material in its support on record thus, there is no reason to interfere with the order of CIT(A) Decided against Revenue.
|