Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2018 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 1858 - HC - Income TaxDisallowance on account of the difference between purchase price of the Stock Appreciation Rights (SAR) and the sale price of such shares at the time of the exercise by the employees - HELD THAT:- The Scheme is analogous to the Employee stock appreciation rights scheme 2007 and is covered in the favour of the assessee by the ruling of this Court in the case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax vs. New Delhi Television Limited’ [2017 (9) TMI 118 - DELHI HIGH COURT] which had in turn relied on a previous judgment of Madras High Court in the case of ‘Commissioner of Income Tax-III, Chennai vs. M/s PVP Ventures Limited, T. Nagar, Chennai [2012 (7) TMI 696 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]. Consequently, no question of law arises on this aspect. Disallowance u/s 14-A - HELD THAT:- ITAT here ruled that since no exempt income was earned during the year, disallowance was impermissible, relying upon the judgment of this Court in the case of ‘Cheminvest Ltd. Vs CIT-VI’, [2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. For this reason, this question of law too does not arise. Disallowance under Section 40 (a) (ia) - Revenue authorities, including the CIT (A), disallowed certain amounts contending that the failure to deduct tax at source from the amount paid to other entities authorized the disallowance - HELD THAT:- ITAT noted that the amounts were paid by way of reimbursement and that there was no finding to the effect that the reimbursement contained any income element. On account of these findings the court is of the opinion that no question of law arises on this aspect. Admit: “Did the ITAT fall into error in permitting the assessee expenditure claimed by it for the period April-2007 to June-2007 (₹ 93,89,552/-) having regard to the circumstance that it commences business from July-2007?”
|