Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (3) TMI 353 - AT - Income TaxDenial of deduction under section 10A - eight separate undertakings being considered as one undertaking and not separate undertaking - Held that:- Claim of deduction cannot be denied unless claim is withdrawn right from the initial assessment year. Respectfully following the decisions of the CIT vs. Paul Brothers [1992 (10) TMI 5 - BOMBAY High Court] and case of Saurashtra Cement & Chemical Industries Ltd [1979 (2) TMI 21 - GUJARAT High Court], we set aside the findings of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to allow the claim of deduction as made by the assessee under section 10A of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) - depreciation claim on software purchased by the assessee - AO found that no TDS has been made on this amount on the ground that the purchases are outside India for outside India - CIT(A) held that AO is incorrect in holding that the assessee has claimed the entire expenditure of ₹ 20,59,671/- as a revenue and restricted the disallowance only to the claim of depreciation of ₹ 6,17,901/- - Held that:- It is an undisputed fact that the assessee has only claimed depreciation and not the entire expenditure. The Tribunal Delhi Bench in the case of SMG Demag (P) (2010 (1) TMI 624 - ITAT, DELHI ) has held that provisions of section 40(a)are not applicable for claim of deduction of depreciation under section 32 of the Act. Payments for purchase of software without deduction tax will not be subject to the provisions of Section 40(a)(i) of the Act.Further, if a similar domestic transaction was made during the year under consideration, it would not have attracted the liability for TDS. Therefore, in the light of the non-discriminatory clause in the Treaty a similar international transaction would also not attract liability of the TDS. - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition on account of arbitration settlement claim - CIT(A) deleted addition - Held that:- It is an undisputed fact that the liability of ₹ 15 lacs Britain Pounds is based on arbitration award dated 10/3/2006. Only a time table has been given for making the payment but the liability has been crystallized during the year under consideration itself and, therefore, the assessee is entitlted for the claim of deduction of the full liability during the year itself. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of Ld. CIT(A). - Decided against revenue. Addition in respect of unbilled software income - CIT(A) deleted addition - Held that:- . As the Ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y 2002-03 no interference is called for.- Decided against revenue.
|