Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (6) TMI 743 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A while computing the book profit/income u/s. 115JB - MAT - Held that:- As in case of Arvind Ltd. vs. DCIT [2015 (7) TMI 118 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] as held that the AO was not entitled to tinker with book profits contemplated under S.115JB towards disallowance made under s. 14A of the Act - Decided in favor of assessee. Additions made u/s 145A on account of unutilized CENVAT/MODVAT credit - Held that:- CIT(A) has correctly concluded the issue in favour of the assessee also having regard to the fact that effect of provisions of Section 145A would be nil in the case of assessee. We find that the CIT(A) has analyzed the issue objectively - Decided in favor of assessee. Disallowance of commission expenses - Held that:- CIT(A) has objectively dealt with the issue and found that commission is relatable to the sales. It was claimed on behalf of the Assessee that the commission has been paid by account payee cheques. Similar commissions have been paid in the earlier year as well which has been duly accepted. The CIT(A) however has rejected the commission payment of ₹ 8.7 Lakhs on the ground that the liability is only provisional and not ascertained liability - we do not see any reason to interfere with order of CIT(A). Set off and carry forward of unabsorbed depreciation - Held that:- The case shall be dealt in accordance with the provisions of Section 32(2) of the Act as amended by the Finance Act, 2001 and not by the provisions of Section 32(2) of the Act as it stood before the said amendment - thus the issue is decided in favor of assessee following the judgement in case of GENERAL MOTORS INDIA PVT. LTD Versus DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX [2012 (8) TMI 714 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] - appeal of revenue is dismissed. Additions made on account of reconciliation of interest as per data available in AIR - Held that:- We consider it expedient to set aside the issue back to the file of the AO for re-examination of facts. The assessee shall provide the reconciliation of difference in question and shall support its claim of taxability in one or the other year. The AO shall adjudicate the issue in accordance with law after proper opportunity given to the assessee in this regard - allowed for statistical purpose. Disallowance under s.14A read with Rule 8D - Held that:- There is no warrant for making disallowance in view of long line of judicial precedent. However, we do not see any merit for setting aside the disallowance towards administrative and general expenses pleaded on behalf of the assessee. The presence of administrative involvement qua the investment activity cannot be ruled out in view of the statutory presumption in this regard, under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the IT Rules. While the assessee gets relief towards disallowance to the extent of ₹ 39,502/- attributable to interest expense, we decline to interfere with the balance disallowance of ₹ 5,68,828/- made under Rule 8D of the IT Rules. Addition towards under valuation of closing stock - Held that:- Having regard to the quantum of stock, the addition merely based on a stock statement filed with bank is not at all justified. Due to smallness of the difference, the bonafides of the assessee is rather implicit. Therefore, we cannot approve a narrow and pedantic approach of the Revenue in this regard. The addition on this score is therefore directed to be deleted.
|