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 767 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IC - eligible units excluding certain items forming part of the operational income of such eligible units and in reducing the deduction - HELD THAT:- We find in the assessee’s own case for the A.Ys 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12 the Hon’ble Tribunal has restored the matter to the file of the AO to determine whether the said items form part of the operational income of the eligible units and allow the deduction u/s 80IC - As relying on [2020 (2) TMI 1270 - ITAT MUMBAI] - We restore the disputed issues to the file of the assessing officer with the similar directions and allow the ground of appeal for statistical purpose. Reallocating 50% of certain administrative and selling and marketing expenses of the non eligible units to the eligible units while computing the deduction u/s 80IC - HELD THAT:- Considering the facts and ratio of the judicial decisions and the DRP directions for the A.Y.2011-12 [2020 (2) TMI 1270 - ITAT MUMBAI] we direct the assessing officer not to restrict the claim u/sec 80IC of the Act by reallocating 50% of administrative and selling & marketing expense of the non eligible unit. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D(2) - HELD THAT:- We find the facts of the present year are similar to earlier year were the contentions envisaged by the Ld.AR that the assessee has not earned tax exempt income and therefore no disallowance U/sec 14A r.w.r 8D(2) is applicable. We considered the ratio of judicial decisions were no disallowance u/sec 14A of the Act is warranted in the absence of earning the exempt income. Accordingly, with the similar directions in the earlier year the assessing officer is directed to delete the disallowance after examination and verification of assessees claim. Transfer pricing adjustment on account of guarantee commission - HELD THAT:- We find the Hon’ble High Court of Bombay [2019 (9) TMI 473 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and Hon’ble Tribunal in assessee’s own case [2020 (2) TMI 1270 - ITAT MUMBAI] has observed that the rate of guarantee commission cannot exceed 0.5% of the guarantee amount. We direct the TPO/AO to restrict the corporate guarantee commission charged by the assessee as against the 2% of the actual barrowed amount considered for ALP by the TPO. Interest on delayed debtors/outstanding receivables from the AE - AR emphasized that the export sales to AEs and non-AEs are similar and the assesssee does not charge any interest from the AEs as well from the Non-AEs, and receives the outstanding amounts generally within the stipulated credit period. AR relied on the judicial decisions supporting the non chargeability of interest. We considering the facts, and circumstances are of the opinion that the assessee is fallowing a consistency approach of equality by not charging any interest from its AEs and non AEs though the payment in exceptional cases received beyond the credit period. Accordingly, we direct the AO/TPO to exclude the charging of interest on delayed debtors in computing the ALP.
|