Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (7) TMI 358 - AT - Income TaxTPA - ALP determination - power of DRP to remit case - Held that:- In the instant case, the DRP has remitted the matter back to the file of TPO to take fresh look of the issues as discussed above. As discussed earlier, the DRP has no power to remit the matter back to the file of the TPO and the DRP alone has to determine the quantum of addition or relief and issue direction to the Assessing Officer. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that the issue should be remitted back to the file of DRP to consider the submissions made by the eligible assessee and to decide the issue afresh on transpricing adjustments. Accordingly, we set aside the transfer pricing issues and remit the matter back to the file of DRP to decide all the transfer pricing issues afresh on merits. The assessee is free to take up all the transfer pricing issues before the DRP Addition on account of provisions made by the assessee for obsolete stocks - Held that:- In the instant case the assessee has not established such fool proof method of identification of slow moving and dead stock and ascertained the liability as per the consistent reliable system. Therefore, the facts of the case relied upon by the assessee are not applicable and the addition made by the AO is confirmed and this ground of appeal of assessee is dismissed. Eligibility for deduction u/s.35D - Held that:- The assessee is entitled for amortization of expenses incurred before the commencement of business and after commencement of business for extension or in connection with the setting up of new unit. In this case, the assessee has incurred the expenditure before setting up of the unit as evidenced from the details and nature of expenditure referred above and as stated by the assessee the expenditure was incurred in 1996-97 relevant to the AY 1997-98. The assessee has made the claim from AY 1997-98 onwards and no disallowance was made during any of the previous years. The AO has not brought on record any evidence controvert the submissions made by the assessee. No new fact has been brought on record to disallow the expenditure in the year under consideration to make the disallowance, having allowed in the earlier Assessment years. Therefore, we hold that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s.35D. Carry forward and set off of unabsorbed depreciation - Held that:- We direct the AO to allow the unabsorbed depreciation of AY 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000 to the extent not set off against the income of the AY 2005-06 for future years. The appeals of the assessee on this issue for the AY 2005-06 & 2008-09 are allowed. Depreciation on UPS - Held that:- UPS is an integral part of computer and eligible for Depreciation @60%. See Sundaram Asset Management Co. Ltd. Versus DCIT [2014 (2) TMI 224 - ITAT CHENNAI ]. Refund due to the company on withholding tax - Held that:- The AO allowed the interest on refund due to the Company as per the credit available according to NSDL records but not on the actual TDS receivables claimed by the company. The AO is directed to verify the receivables and allow interest as permitted by the law. This ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes.
|