Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (9) TMI 89 - AT - Income TaxAddition on account of income from “Dilli Haat” - treating part of income from “Dilli Haat” as rental income and restricting the claim of expenses to 30% of the receipts - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2018 (4) TMI 699 - ITAT DELHI] we direct the AO to assess the amount of ₹ 2,39,66,739/- received by assessee for use of the craft stalls in A. Y. 2010-11 and ₹ 2,78,05,181/- for A. Y. 2012-13 as Assessee’s income under the head “Profits and Gains of Business or Profession” and the balance amount of ₹ 98,87,914/- for A.Y. 2010-11 and ₹ 1,98,51,494/- for A.Y. 2012-13 is to be assessed as “Income from House Property”. Addition to the income of the assessee on account of understatement of bank interest - HELD THAT:- Income of a taxpayer is not required to be computed merely with reference to the TDS Certificate, but assessment of an income is an altogether independent exercise. We wish to add that income of an Assessee under the head “Profits and Gains of Business or Profession” and “Income from other sources” is to be determined regardless of whether tax was deducted at source in respect of amounts received or accrued to the assessee. What is relevant is the system of accounting regularly employed by the assessee - whether it is cash system or mercantile system. The assessee is not permitted to use mixed or hybrid system of accounting under which some items of income / expenditure are accounted for under cash system and the remaining items of income / expenditure are accounted for under mercantile. Assessee is a public sector undertaking is irrelevant. It is also immaterial whether the assessee was facing liquidity crunch. When the income has to be assessed during the year and when tax is to be paid in accordance with law on such income, the assessee cannot postpone the year in which the income will be offered to tax merely because the assessee has a liquidity crunch. Requirement of liquid funds by an assessee, howsoever genuine the requirement may be, cannot be accepted as a legitimate justification for postponement of the year in which income will be offered by the assessee. Therefore, in the facts of the case before us, the exercise of determining assessee’s income lead us to the conclusion that the aforesaid income amounting by way of interest on Fixed Deposits in Bank is to be assessed during the year. Addition u/s 43B on account of advance excise duty - HELD THAT:- Respectfully following these judicial precedents, we also decide this issue in favour of the assessee and direct the AO to delete additions for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 made by the Assessing Officer U/s 43B of I.T. Act on account of advance excise duty. Disallowance of the provision for the Leave Encashment - AO invoked Section 43B(f) of I.T. Act and made additions - HELD THAT:- This issue is covered against the assessee vide aforesaid order [2018 (4) TMI 699 - ITAT DELHI] of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Delhi in assessee’s own case. Respectfully following the aforesaid decision of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Delhi vide order dated 28.03.2018; we also decide this issue in favour of Revenue Disallowance of the payment made by the assessee to Central Road Research Institute (“CRRI”) for undertaking research regarding the concrete strength in bridges and had claimed weighted deduction @ 125% of the sum so paid U/s 35(1)(iia) - AO disallowed this claim on the ground that the documentary evidence did not contain the name of the assessee - HELD THAT:- After considering the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and on perusal of the evidences filed by the Ld. AR of the assessee and after taking into account the submissions made by the Ld. AR of the assessee, we are of the view that the claim made by the assessee is proper and sustainable. The order passed by Ld. CIT(A) on this issue is sound, proper and in accordance with law in the facts and circumstances of the case. Disallowances of loss claimed - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) allowed assessee’s claim, holding that the assessee has been exclusively managing, administrating this institute without any interference of the concerned Ministry; and that the AO had not disputed that the institute was run by the assessee and had sustained the losses claimed by the assessee. At the time of hearing before us, the Ld. DR drew our attention to the facts that the issue was remanded back to the AO in [2018 (4) TMI 699 - ITAT DELHI] in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2009-10. The Ld. DR submitted that for A.Y. 2010-11 and 2012-13 also this issue may be remanded back to the AO for fresh order after necessary verification of the claim. The Ld. AR of the assessee agreed that the issue may be remanded back to the AO for fresh order. Disallowance being 50% of the expenses claimed by assessee towards “Tourism promotion expense” and “Hiring of tent & purpose thereof” - HELD THAT:- Assessee submitted that the issue may be remanded back to the file of the AO for verification and fresh order on this issue. In reply, the Ld. DR did not express any objection to remanding of the issue back to the file of the AO for verification and fresh order. In the fitness of things, and as both sides agree, we remand this issue to the file of the AO for necessary verification and fresh order. The AO is directed, before he passes fresh order, to provide opportunity to the assessee to produce / submit relevant details and documentary evidences.
|