Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2023 (1) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (1) TMI 1341 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - case of the assessee that the own interest free reserves are far more than the amount of investment, therefore, no disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules should have been made with regard to the interest element - HELD THAT:- The said issue has been decided in Assessee’s own case for A.Y.2011- 12, 2012-13 [2023 (7) TMI 1357 - ITAT DELHI] By respectfully following the order in assessee’s own case, we are of the opinion that disallowance under Rule-8D(2)(ii) of the IT Rules should not have made by the AO, thus, the disallowance made by the AO is hereby deleted. Further, we direct the AO to compute the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.Rule-8D(2)(iii) of the Rules by considering only investment from each exempt income is earned. Accordingly, ground No.1 of the Revenue and the assessee are disposed off. Unexplained investment - search was conducted on the assessee wherein an estimated working was seized from the Laptop of the employee of the assessee containing details of certain land which was registered in the name of the assessee - HELD THAT:- It is well settled law that the dumb documents having no evidentiary value cannot be taken as sole basis for determination of undisclosed income of the assessee. If the Department of Revenue wants to make use of dumb documents, then the onus on the Revenue Department to collect cogent corroborative evidences. As decided in the case of Mumar Trading Co. 2007 (9) TMI 284 - HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD] held that, it is settled principle of law that if the Revenue wants to rely upon the entries of the document, seized from the premises of third party, the burden lies upon the Revenue Authorities to prove the genuineness and authenticity of the said entries to connect the said entry with the dealer. As found that the person from who’s possession the seized document is recovered, was not subject to the cross examination of the assessee and no opportunity of cross examination has been given to the assessee. Therefore, for the detailed discussion made above, in our considered opinion, AO as well as the CIT(A) have committed error in making the addition u/s 69 of the Act which deserves to be deleted. Accordingly, the ground No.2 of the assessee is allowed and the subject addition sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) is deleted. Allowability of claim of education Cess - HELD THAT:- In view of the above settled position of law, we hold that the education Cess can’t be allowed as an allowable expense, accordingly, we find no merit in Ground of the assessee and the Ground assessee is dismissed. Nature of receipt - FPS/FMS receipt - capital receipt received as per foreign trade policy in computing the total income of the assessee - HELD THAT:- The issue of claim of FPS/FMS as capital receipt received as per foreign trade policy in computing total income has been dealt and decided by the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in Assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2013-14 in favour of the assessee [2023 (7) TMI 1357 - ITAT DELHI] Apart from the same, the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Ajmer Vs. Nitin Spinners Ltd [2019 (9) TMI 1154 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] held Focus Marketing Scheme was concerned, apparently the Central Government gave the subsidy to enhance Indian export potential in the international market. It was not granted to meet the cost of expenditure to meet the competition of the Indian textile market. The ITAT took note of judgment in Ponni Sugars & Chemicals Ltd. [2008 (9) TMI 14 - SUPREME COURT] and held that the amount was not an export incentive, but rather capital receipt and therefore, not taxable. This Court is of the opinion that there is no infirmity with the reason. Judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan has also been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court wherein the SLP filed by the Department has been dismissed which is reported [2021 (9) TMI 430 - SC ORDER] Interest subsidy under TUFFS - capital or revenue receipt - HELD THAT:- The allowability of claim of interest subsidy under TUFFS and RIPS have been decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Rajasthan in the case of PCIT vs. Nitin Spinners Ltd. [2019 (9) TMI 1154 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT] the amount was received as capital stream and therefore, not taxable.
|