Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 1553 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - HELD THAT:- Assessee did not deny the fact of incurring expenditure for managing the investments which are in relation to earning of exempt income. The investments have huge potential in giving or earning exempt income like dividend income in the assessment year under consideration or also in the future years. After considering various decisions and case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. ITO [2009 (8) TMI 126 - ITAT DELHI-B] wherein, it was held that disallowance under section 14A can be made even in the year where no exempt income has been earned or received by the assessee. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/s. Godrej & Boyce. Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] held that the Assessing Officer is duty bound to determine the expenditure which had been incurred in relation to income which did not form part of the total income. In view of the above, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed. Addition towards deferred revenue income - taxation of the time shares sold comprising 55% of the time share value which was treated by the assessee as advance subscription towards customers facilities in the accounts - AO was of the view that the entire sale amount including 55% is taxable in the year of receipt - AO made the disallowance only on the ground that similar issue for earlier assessment year is pending before the Hon’ble High Court - HELD THAT:- Assessee furnished decision of the ITAT D Bench Chennai in assessee’s own case for the assessment years 2002-03, 2006-07, 2007-08 and 2008-09 [2012 (8) TMI 1171 - ITAT CHENNAI] wherein ITAT allowed the claim of the assessee to defer the income in the subsequent years on the basis of the ITAT Chennai B Bench (Special Bench) in the case of M/s Mahindra Holidays & Resorts(India) Ltd. [2010 (5) TMI 524 - ITAT, CHENNAI] . By following the decision of the Tribunal, the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The ld. DR could file any decision having reversed or modified the orders of the Tribunal. Just because, the Department has filed an appeal against the order of the Tribunal, we cannot take a different view on this account. - Decided against revenue.
|