Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (7) TMI 1270 - AT - Income TaxIncome from sale of shares - correct head of income - business income OR capital gain - HELD THAT:- Under similar set of facts, it was held by the Tribunal in own case [2019 (4) TMI 1373 - ITAT DELHI] that the income from sale of shares cannot be taxable as business income, but has to be taxed as capital gain. Since there is no dispute as to the similarity of facts, in the absence of any reasons compelling us to take a different view, while following the same, we hold the issue in favour of the assessee Disallowance of proportional interest u/s 36 (1)(iii) - borrowed funds to the extent of funds advanced in respect of share application money - HELD THAT:- This issue also is no longer res integra and is covered by the order in ITA No. 6585/Del/2015 for the assessment year 2011-12 [2019 (4) TMI 1373 - ITAT DELHI]. Since the facts and circumstances are very similar to those involved for the years under consideration, while respectfully following the same, we hold that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd [2017 (3) TMI 1254 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] the presumption in favour of the assessee that the advances were only out of this surplus funds and such a presumption does not stand reverted, and consequently the issue is held in favour of the assessee. Addition u/s 14 A and Rule 8D - recording of satisfaction - HELD THAT:- AO failed to record his satisfaction recording the correctness of the claim made by the assessee in relation to expenditure incurred to earn exempt income and therefore, we find it difficult to sustain any disallowance whatsoever on this aspect. We, therefore, while accepting the contention of the assessee and respectfully following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Vedanta [2019 (1) TMI 476 - DELHI HIGH COURT] delete the addition made u/s 14 A and Rule 8D. Deduction u/s 24 - disallowance of prior period expenses - HELD THAT:- All these issues are covered by the order dated 12/02/2019 for the assessment year 2011-12 in assessee’s own case [2019 (4) TMI 1373 - ITAT DELHI] Addition on account of late deposit of PF - HELD THAT:- Ld. CIT(A) deleted the same by following the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Vinay Cements Ltd [2007 (3) TMI 346 - SC ORDER] and the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. AIMIL Ltd [2009 (12) TMI 38 - DELHI HIGH COURT] . No fact is brought to our notice which renders these two decisions inapplicable to the facts of the case on hand are as to how the Ld. CIT(A) went wrong in following the decision in these 2 cases. We, therefore, do not find any illegality or irregularity in the conclusion reached by the Ld. CIT(A) on this aspect.
|