Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 126 - AT - Income TaxAdvance amount received - unreported receipts from Wardha Power Co.- appellant stated that the same was part of advance money received from the party and which was subsequently assigned to M/s. Viz Projects Pvt. Ltd. as part of settlement agreement - HELD THAT:- As assessee demonstrated that the assessee transferred the work and outstanding balance to M/s VIZ. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition being the advance amount received from Wardha Power Pvt. Ltd. and upholding the order of CIT(A), we dismiss the ground raised by the revenue on this issue. Addition u/s 40(a)(ia) - service fee paid without effecting TDS - AO considered the same as contingent liability and also disallowed it as a payment which cannot be allowed as a revenue expenditure - HELD THAT:- As per the agreement dated 26/09/2005 entered into between assessee and Amongst VIZ Projects Pvt. Ltd. & Sainj as per clause 7, the assessee shall pay the service at 10% on the upset amount of ₹ 50 crores to VIZ and Sainj in proportion to the amounts set up by them before end of November, 2006 - liability of 5 crores is not contingent in nature and was liability for the year under consideration and the assessee has rightly the same as revenue expenditure in view of the said agreement - No infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) in deleting the addition of ₹ 5 crores made by the AO u/s 40(a)(ia) treating it as contingent in nature. Accordingly, the ground raised by the revenue on this issue is dismissed. Addition of damages for idling of their facilities and loss of business - HELD THAT:- As the assessee had foregone the claim of damages regarding idling as granted by the arbitrator vide the final agreement letter dated 11/05/2010 with HPCL. Based on this letter, the CIT(A) deleted the addition made by the AO treating the awarded claim of damages regarding idling as granted by the arbitrator, as income of the assessee, without taking into consideration the documentary evidence. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) on this issue and upholding the same, we dismiss the ground raised by the revenue on this issue.
|