Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (4) TMI 1424 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 36(1)(viia) to be restricted to the provision made in books as against the entire eligible amount - HELD THAT:- As decided in assessee's own case a look into the original assessment order clearly show that but for the deduction allowed to the assessee as claimed by it in its return, there was no discussion as to how Section 36(1)(viia) was applied and whether the limits were corrected worked out - No question was asked to the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings also with regard to the claim made by it under Section 36(1)(viia), insofar as it concerns the quantum of such claim. This obviously show that there was no application of mind by the Assessing Officer at the time of assessment. AO had not come to any conclusion at all having not considered the claim in the light of the conditions set out in Section 36(1)(viia) of the Act. We cannot say that he had taken a view which was in accordance with law. It is not a case where the Assessing Officer had adopted one of the courses possible in law. Of course, a cryptic order of the Assessing Officer by itself may not show that there was no thought given by him on a claim of the assessee. - decided against assessee. Addition u/s 14A - HELD THAT:- We have gone through the order of the assessment order. There is no finding in the assessment order regarding treatment of exempted income yielding assets as stock-in-trade. Hence, in our opinion, if it is treated as stock-in-trade by the assessee, then the claim of assessee is to be allowed Restricting the relief u/s.90 to the extent of tax paid in the foreign country - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) has quoted a notification No.S.O 2123(E) dated 28.8.2008, clarifying that in such a case involving a DTAA, an income has to be included in the total receipts and the necessary relief is to be granted by ‘elimination’ method or as per the terms of agreement seeking to avoid double taxation. He relies upon Finance Act, 2012 inserting explanation 3 to section 90 making the notification retrospectively applicable. Deduction under section 36(1)(viia) - HELD THAT:- Aggregate average advances outstanding at the end of each month and not the incremental advances granted during each month while computing deduction under section 36(1)(viia) Loss on revaluation of investments to be decided in favour of assessee Depreciation on UPS allowed at 60% - HELD THAT:- We dismiss the ground raised by the Revenue. Further, we make it clear that if it is allowed as bad debt in earlier years and recovered the same in the assessment year under consideration to be treated as income of assessee. 28. The Sixth ground is with regard to depreciation on UPS allowed at 60%. Allowability of provision for leave encashment - HELD THAT:- Provision made by the appellant-company for meeting the liability incurred by it under the leave encashment scheme proportionate with the entitlement earned by employees of the company, inclusive of the officers and the staff, subject to the ceiling on accumulation as applicable on the relevant date, is entitled to deduction out of the gross receipts for the accounting year during which the provision is made for the liability. The liability is not a contingent liability. Applicability of the provisions of section 115JB - HELD THAT:- As decided in assessee's own case no application to its bank [2013 (4) TMI 919 - ITAT CHENNAI]
|