Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (6) TMI 1635 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D - sufficiency of own funds - HELD THAT:- In this year the assessee earned dividend income much higher than the earlier year which is why taking into consideration the entire gamut of the matter, AO applied the provision of Section 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Act. However, we find from records that the interest to the tune needs to be deleted in view of the particular fact that the own fund of the assessee exceeds investment. Therefore, a presumption can be drawn that such investment was made out of the own fund of the assessee. Disallowance of administrative expenditure - Under the specific circumstances when the AO has failed to establish the nexus that investment was made out on interest bearing funds disallowance towards administrative expenditure is not permissible. We find the fact of the case before us and that of the judgment cited upon is similarly situated and in the absence of any changed facts of the case, we do not find any reason to deviate from the same in confirming the estimated disallowance to the tune of ₹ 1,50,000/- as made by the Learned CIT(A) which is not permissible and therefore, bad in law. Thus the same is liable to be quashed. Hence, we delete such addition made by the Learned CIT(A). The assessee’s appeal is thus allowed. Disallowance of interest @12% - Interest free advances to three parties on which no interest was charged - HELD THAT:- As relying on assessee's own [2018 (12) TMI 1679 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] case we find no infirmity in the order impugned passed by the first appellate authority so far as to warrant interference. The question is accordingly answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Consequently, the appeals fails and accordingly dismissed. We find no infirmity in the order impugned passed by the first appellate authority so far as to warrant interference. The question is accordingly answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Consequently, the appeals fails and accordingly dismissed. Deduction u/s 80IA on a much higher amount than to earlier years - right of amalgamating company to claim deduction - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2018 (12) TMI 1679 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] relevant legal provision has already been elaborated by the Ld. CIT(A) in his findings that as per the provisions of section 80IA(12) when any undertaking of an Indian Company which is entitled to deduction under this section is transferred before the expiry of the period specified in this section to another Indian Company then as per clause (b) the provision of this section shall apply to the amalgamated Company as they would have applied to the amalgamating Company if the amalgamation had not taken place and the provisions of subsection (12) would only apply if the amalgamating Company was eligible for claiming deduction u/s 80IA. It is demonstrated from the above facts and circumstances that the assessing officer has disallowed the claim of the assessee on presumption basis that addition was old plant and machinery without bringing on record evidence to substantiate that specified machinery was purchased by Shanti processor Ltd and the assessing officer has also failed to disproved the material fact that similar claim was allowed to the assessee in the assessment year 2009-10 on fulfilling of all the conditions. - Decided against revenue.
|