Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (5) TMI 844 - AT - Income TaxInterest received from Bank deposits to the extent as income from other sources.- CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- The income from interest by the assessee since is assessable separately under the head “income from other sources”, therefore, this income cannot be set off against the expenditure incurred by the assessee prior to set up. We accordingly set aside the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) - Decided in favour of revenue. Addition of capital expenditure claimed under the head “loan syndication charges” - CIT(A) deleted the addition - Held that:- This expenditure under section 40A(2) (a) has been incurred by the assessee during the year but this expenditure has not been claimed as revenue expenditure as contended by the ld. A.R. This expenditure has been debited by the assessee under the head “work-in-progress”. The disallowance has been made by the Assessing Officer by applying the provisions of section 40A(2)(a). On perusal of section 40A(2)(a), it is apparent that this section is applicable only for restricting the claim of any expenditure, which is otherwise allowable while computing the income under the head “profit and gains of the business or profession”. Since the expenditure has not been claimed by the assessee while computing the income under the head “income from business”, therefore, no disallowance under section 40A(2)(a) can be made. The provisions of sect ion 40A(2)(a) are applicable only if the assessee has claimed deduction of the expenditure while computing the income under the head “income from business”. We noted that no such expenditure has been claimed, therefore, the disallowance under section 40A(2)(a) cannot be made - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of the interest expenses on account of term loan - CIT(A)deleted the addition - Held that:- In this case the assessee has incurred interest amounting to ₹ 86,90,220/- on the term loan from Central Bank of India. The said interest has not been claimed by the assessee as deduction while computing the income under the head “income from business”. The said interest, in fact, has been capitalized by the assessee under the head “work-in-progress”, i.e. the expenditure has been capitalized by the assessee. It is not a case where the assessee has claimed deduction under section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act while computing the income from business. Once the assessee itself has not claimed as revenue expenditure, therefore, in our opinion, no disallowance should have been made. - Decided against revenue. Disallowance of compensation paid for acquisition of land - CIT(A)deleted the addition - Held that:- . It is not a case when the land has been compulsory acquired under any law, therefore, in the absence of sect ion 194LA being applicable, no question of any deduction of TDS arises. The provisions of section 194LA are not applicable when the assessee has purchased the immovable property by an agreement or sale deed. We accordingly confirm the order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) in deleting the addition of ₹ 12,60,000/- and dismiss this ground of appeal taken by the Revenue. - Decided against revenue.
|