Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 979 - AT - Income TaxDeduction under section 80-IA - AO disallowed claim on the reason that the assessee has not complied with the provisions of section 80-IA(4)(iv)(c) also confirmed by CIT(A) - Held that:- the assessee's claim of capitalisation of expenditure incurred on renovation and modernisation in the books of account is a condition precedent for allowing the claim of deduction under section 80IA(4)(iv)(c) of the Act. In the present case, since the plant and machinery used for transmission and distribution of electricity has been acquired from Tata Tea Ltd., it cannot be said that the book value appearing in the books of Tata Tea Ltd. as on April 1, 2004 relates to the assessee-company. Being so, in our opinion the assessee has not complied with the provisions of section 80-IA(4)(iv)(c) of the Income-tax Act. Further, we make it clear that income so increased on disallowance of deduction under section 80-IA(4)(iv) of the Income-tax Act, is to be considered as income from plantation of tea only - Decided against the assessee. Restriction on allowance u/s 43B - Held that:- In the present case, the contribution to the approved gratuity fund cannot be allowed. Being so, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is justified in disallowing the same. The claim of the assessee that for invoking the provisions of section 43B, actual payment is to be allowed. This argument of the assessee is totally misconstrued. Only the expenditure relevant to the assessment year under consideration is to be allowed. Being so, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). - Decided against assessee. Alternative claim that in the event of disallowance, it should be considered as part of the income from tea business - relied on the judgment of Karimtharuvi Tea Estates Ltd. v. State of Kerala [1962 (11) TMI 44 - SUPREME COURT] - Held that:- If the assessee claimed as expenditure relevant to the tea business, then, it should be considered as income of the tea business only. Disallowance of provision made for dearness allowance - the liability is unascertained and is to be treated as contingent liability - Held that:- If this amount is claimed as relating to tea business as a expenditure on adding back the same to the income of the assessee, then it is to be treated as income from tea business only. With this observation, we dismiss this ground.
|