Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (5) TMI 520 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of discounts offered to doctors - allowable expenditure u/s.37 or not? - HELD THAT:- It is the case of the assessee that the trade discounts given to the doctors are similar to the discounts given to the distributors and other dealers which is an allowable expenditure under section 37 of the Act. This view is confirmed by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for the Asstt.Year 2009-10 [2019 (4) TMI 414 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] Respectfully following the decision, we set aside the orders of the CIT(A) and AO and direct the AO to allow trade discount paid to the Doctors as ordinary business expenditure. Thus, we allow ground no.1 in favour of the assessee. Disallowance u/s. 14A read with rule 8D - HELD THAT:- We do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A) so far as deletion representing interest expenses. However, upholding of disallowance being administrative expenses was not based on logical parameters. We find similar issue came up for hearing before the Tribunal for the Asstt.Year 2013-14 in assessee’s own case [2019 (7) TMI 537 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] wherein Co-ordinate Bench remitted back the issue to the file of AO with direction to re-compute the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) and consider only the investments which have actually yielded exempt income instead of gross investment. We are of the view that similar direction to the AO to decide the issue afresh in line with the directions of the Tribunal in AY 2013-14 would be just and appropriate in this assessment year also. We hold so and direct the AO accordingly. Levy of interest under section 234A of the Act for delay in filing return of income - HELD THAT:- As per the assessee, the assessee had furnished the return of income for year under consideration within the due date prescribed under section 139(1) of the Act. Though this interest is consequential in a nature, this issue is remitted back to the file of the AO to decide whether interest of Rs.1,97,584/- was in accordance with law or not. Allowing the differential interest made out of interest claimed under section 36(1)(iii) of the Act by treating it as a business expenditure - HELD THAT:- We find that the issue of payment of interest on overdue bills to the Sun Pharma Ltd. does not require elaborate discussion because, as stated by the ld.Senior Counsel, the issue was being agitated time and again i.e. in the year 1997-98, 2010-2011, 2011- 12 and 2012-13 and the assessee has succeeded in all these years either before the CIT(A) or before the ITAT and even before the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court [2010 (5) TMI 823 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] Thus we dismiss this ground of appeal of the Revenue.
|