Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (9) TMI 1206 - ITAT MUMBAIDeduction by way of depreciation u/s 32(1) - in the earlier years and, therefore, the written down value on which depreciation was to be allowed for the year under consideration should have been higher to that extent - HELD THAT:- In the year in question the assessee has claimed depreciation and there is no question of thrust of any depreciation but its grievance is that the final orders of the earlier years which have not been properly implemented. The assessee desires there should be a specific direction to the Assessing Officer on this behalf so as not to disturb the finality of the orders of the orders of the earlier years. Departmental Representative on the other hand, has no objection if a specific direction is given to the AO. We, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer that the written down value as at the beginning of the year shall be computed only on the basis of the orders which have already reached the finality. In other words, the depreciation actually claimed or directed to be allowed only shall be taken into consideration before arriving the written down value of the assets in question. Disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(iii) - HELD THAT:- A perusal of the cash flow statement at Annual report shows that the assessee had sufficient cash accruals from its own funds therefore we agree with the contention of the Ld. Counsel that no part of interest can be disallowed nor this issue is before us. Disallowance of other direct or indirect expenditure, the assessee has computed the disallowance at ₹ 24,304/- by allocating the salary paid to junior accountant. We do not agree with this computation of disallowance by the assessee. It is an undisputed fact that investment is a policy decision taken by the Board of Directors at the highest level which requires lot of consultancy from various experts. Therefore, the disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(iii) becomes imperative, as the disallowance have been computed by the AO as per the applicable provisions of law. We do not find any reason to interfere with the disallowance.
|