Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 1228 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A r/w rule 8 - CIT(A) deleting part of the addition - Held that:- As perused the Balance-sheet of the Assessee it is noticed that the investments are carry forward investments right from 2008-09. There is no new investment during the relevant assessment year. The assessment order for the A.Y 2008-09 was also found which also says there is no disallowance made u/s 14A. Further, it is noticed that the Assessee does not have any exempt income much less dividend income. Consequently, we are of the view that in view of the decision of Delite Enterprises [2009 (2) TMI 498 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ] no disallowance u/s 14A can be made in the hands of the Assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of expenditure of interest paid on loans taken at interest and advances to sister concerns without charging any interest - CIT(A) deleting the addition - Held that:- As it is noticed that the advances to the associates has actually reduced during the relevant assessment year when compared to the earlier assessment year, it shows that these advances were of the earlier years and substantial portion of the advances have been returned. Admittedly, there is no disallowance on this count in the earlier year also. In the circumstances, following the principles of consistency, no disallowance can be made for this year also in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Sridev Enterprises [1991 (1) TMI 52 - KARNATAKA High Court]- Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of interest paid to the partners and relatives by invoking the provisions of Sec. 40A(2) - CIT(A) deleting the addition - Held that:- Admittedly, when invoking the provisions of Sec. 40A(2) of the Act comparable case is one of the requirement. Here, in the present case the AO has not been able to show any comparable case where the interest payments were lower than the rates paid by the Assessee. In the circumstances, we are of the view that the finding of the ld. CIT(A) was on a right footing and does not call for any interference. - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition on account of taxing of profits on the basis of percentage completion method on the construction of villas - Assessee was booking profits of villas by following the completed contract method - CIT(A) in deleting the addition - Held that:- CIT(A) has followed the decision of V.S. Dempo & Co. Pvt. Ltd. [1993 (9) TMI 346 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein held that the completed contract method is an acceptable method and that consistency is to be followed and also the decision of Realest Builders and Services Ltd. [2008 (5) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT] and as the Assessee has offered the income on the completion of the villas and this fact is not disputed by the Revenue, we are of the view that the order of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue is on a right footing and does not call for any interference - Decided in favour of assessee.
|