Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (6) TMI 89 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance being expenditure incurred towards public issue - Held that:- As decided in case of Brook Bond India Ltd. Vs. CIT [1997 (2) TMI 11 - SUPREME Court] expenditure incurred by a company in connection with the issue of shares with a view to increase its share capital, is directly related to the expansion of the capital base of the company and is capital expenditure, even though it may incidentally help in the business of the company and in the profit making. - Decided against assessee. Disallowance being the amount written off as bad debt - Held that:- The assessee had written off ₹ 2,80,000/- as bad debt being the loan given to Mr. Anup Kumar. The learned Assessing Officer disallowed the same because the conditions laid down in section 36(1)(vi) of the Act was not fulfilled. On appeal, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the order of the learned Assessing Officer because the assessee did not furnish any details regarding the amount advanced to Mr. Anup Kumar. We also do not find it necessary to interfere with the orders of the Revenue because even before us at this stage, the assessee has not furnished any details in regard to the loan extended to Mr. Anup Kumar. Therefore we are not able to ascertain whether the loan was given during the course of the business of the assessee and for the business purpose of the assessee or due to its credit sale. - Decided against assessee. Disallowance being the amount written off as miscellaneous expenditure - Held that:- We find merit in the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) because he has rightly disallowed the expenditure incurred towards issue of share capital because it was incurred towards issue of equity share capital and therefore falls in the field of Capital expenditure.- Decided against assessee. Disallowance being the amount written off as loss on investment - Held that:- No scope to interfere with the orders of the Revenue because from the facts of the case it is apparent that the company has invested in the shares of M/s Money Shopee Network Ltd., and shown under the head ‘investment’. Only when such shares are sold, capital gain/loss will arise in the case of the assessee. However in this case before us, the assessee has neither sold the shares nor converted the investment into stock-in-trade. Therefore, we confirm the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on this issue - Decided against assessee. Addition being the Keyman’s Insurance Bonus - Held that:- Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the order of the learned Assessing Officer because as per the provisions of section 10(10D) of the Act, the amount received on the maturity of the keyman insurance policy is taxable along with the bonus received by the assessee company. We find merit in the orders of the Revenue because the provisions of section 10(10D) of the Act specifically excludes “any sum received under keyman insurance policy” from the “income which do not form part of the total income” under Chapter III of the Act. Therefore, we hereby confirm the order of the Revenue on this issue.- Decided against assessee.
|