Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 1801 - AT - Income TaxAddition on account of rent payment to M/s Tag Enterprises in absence of Rent agreement - Held that:- CIT (A) has relied on the case of M/s Murjani Retails Pvt. Ltd. a group company of the assessee in which the CIT (A) has decided the identical issue in favour of the assessee. The assessee has explained during the appellate proceedings that the premises Metro Dome, 4th Floor, Metro Theatre, M.G. Road, Mumbai was shared by the group company aforesaid and the rent and amenities were also equally shared. The coordinate Bench has allowed the identical deduction in the case of the group company M/s Murjani Retails Pvt. Ltd.. Since, the coordinate Bench has decided the identical issue in favour of the assessee and since the order of the Ld. CIT (A) is in accordance with the findings of the coordinate Bench, we do not find any reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld.CIT (A) Addition on account of unpaid VAT and Service tax liability - whether assessee should have credited these amounts to the P&L account and should have claimed deduction u/s 43B? - Held that:- The findings of the Ld. CIT (A) are based on the evidence on record. Since, the assessee has not debited the profit and loss account, the assessee has not claimed the same as expenditure. Therefore, the said amount cannot be added back u/s 43B of the Act. Hence, we do not find any legal or factual infirmity in the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) to interfere with. Hence, we uphold the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the revenue. Disallowance under the provisions of section 36(1)(va) read with section 2(24)(x) - payment of Employees contribution to the Provident Funds beyond the prescribed date under the PF Act - Held that:- We notice that the AO has admitted in its report that the assessee had paid the amount of contribution in question before the due date of filing of return. Since, the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) are based on the evidence on record and the report submitted by the AO, we do not find any infirmity in the said findings to interfere with the same. We accordingly uphold the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the revenue.
|