Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2019 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 1532 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IA - eligibility for Renupower Unit Nos. 6 and 7 and Co-Generation Plant - arrying on the eligible business - HELD THAT:- substantial questions admitted in appeal question i to ix relating to deduction of eligibility for Renupower Unit and Co-Generation Plant Disallowance made by the A.O. u/s 36(i)(iii) as confirmed by the CIT(A) under the provisions of Sec. 14A - HELD THAT:- Issue is covered against the Revenue by virtue of judgment of this Court in case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014 (8) TMI 119 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] . We are informed that the appeal against such judgment of the High Court has also been dismissed by the Supreme Court. This question is, therefore, not considered. Disallowance of sum paid to IFFCO as per arbitration proceedings - HELD THAT:- Tribunal has correctly relied upon and referred to the decision of the Gujarat High Court in case of Navjivan Roller Flour & Pulse Mills Ltd Vs. Dy. CIT [2009 (3) TMI 132 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] in which it was held that the liability of the assessee to pay damages would arise on the date of the award of such damages even if the award was challenged by the assessee in appeal. This question is, therefore, not considered. TP Adjustment of purchase price of copper concentrate - adjustment was made based on internal comparables and for the same month of transactions - HELD THAT:- We notice that the Tribunal has examined the facts on record and come to the conclusion that the assessee had entered into a long term agreement with the associated enterprise for procuring copper concentrates. The Tribunal examined the material on record at length to come to the conclusion that in the process, there was no excess payment and therefore, there was no need for transfer pricing adjustment. The entire issue being factual in nature, no interference is called for. Reducing the rate of guarantee commission from 1.75% to 0.50% - HELD THAT:- the issue is covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of CIT, Mumbai Vs. M/s. Everest Kento Cylinders Ltd. [2015 (5) TMI 395 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] . It was held that there is different between corporate guarantee and bank guarantee. Additional depreciation u/s 32(iia) in respect of Co-Generation in Plant-2 - Tribunal allowed claim - HELD THAT:- The Revenue fairly states that the same does not arise out of the impugned judgment of the Tribunal. Deduction u/S. 80IA applying the UPSEB/s market rate - HELD THAT:- This Court in recent judgment in case of CIT-LTU Vs. Reliance Industries Ltd. [2019 (2) TMI 178 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] had considered such a question and dismissed the same by referring and relying upon the decision of Gujarat High Court in case of Pr. CIT Vs. Gujarat Glass Works (P) Ltd [2016 (10) TMI 1111 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] . This question is, therefore, not considered. Exemption of interest received from DHIL u/s 10(23G) on a gross basis even though the assessee company has claimed the intereset paid to DHIL as an expenditure - HELD THAT:- The similar issue has been decided against the Revenue by this Court in case of this very assessee by judgment [2012 (9) TMI 159 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] . This question is also not considered.
|