Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 1117 - AT - Income TaxTPA - comparable selection criteria - Held that:- Assessee is engaged in cutting edge product without appreciating that the products are not conceptualized in India and hence the role of PSC is limited to only that of a routine captive service provider, thus companies functionally dissimilar with that of assessee need to be deselected from final list. Depreciation claimed by the assessee @ 30% on moulds on the ground that these are used in plastic factories - Held that:- AR has just verbally submitted that in most of the products which are manufactured by the assessee are made up of plastic product which appears to be true. But as such no documentary evidence was filed in support of the assessee claim. However in the interest of justice & fair play, we are inclined to restore this matter to the file of AO for fresh adjudication in accordance with the law. The ld. AR is directed to produce necessary documents in support of his claim. Hence the ground of appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Credit of tds - Held that:- We direct the AO to grant the amount of TDS as per the provision of law Surcharge on DDT - Held that:- On perusal of records, we find that the surcharge applicable for the AY 2011-12 is 7.5%. But it is undisputed fact that dividend was declared and distributed and paid in AY 2012-13 and therefore the surcharge as applicable to the AY 2012-13 i.e. @ 5% should be applied on the DDT. In view of above, we direct the AO to delete the extra surcharge levied on the DDT Addition on AMP expenses as international transaction - Held that:- AMP cannot be regarded as international transaction. In holding so we find the support & guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maruti Suzuki India Limited Vs. CIT [2015 (12) TMI 634 - DELHI HIGH COURT] Addition on account of lease rental paid for the cars - AO was of the view that the expenditure incurred on lease rental are in the nature of capital expenditure - Held that:- We find that the issu9e under dispute is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ICDS Ltd [2013 (1) TMI 344 - SUPREME COURT ] decided in favour of the assessee Addition on account of waiver of loan - Held that:- We note the loan amount was taken by the assessee through cheque / cash. The ld. DR has also not brought anything on record contrary to the argument of ld. AR. Thus in our considered opinion the amount of loan waived off by the assessee is capital transaction and outside the purview of tax net. Hence the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed
|