Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (8) TMI 440 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IA(8) - power supplied to the steel division - Whether CIT(A) was justified in holding that the market value of the power is the rate of power available in the open market namely the price charged by the Electricity Board? - Whether goods of one unit of a company can be transferred to another unit at a notional figure? - whether or not the A.O had rightly triggered the provisions of Section 80IA(8) of the Act by adopting the domestic purchase price of electricity by CSEB as the “market rate” and justifiably scaled down the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s.80IA(4)(iv)(a) ? - HELD THAT:- As claimed by the Ld. AR, and rightly so, the aforesaid issue as on date is squarely covered by the order of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2008-09, i.e. ACIT-1(2) Vs. Mahindra Sponge and Power Limited [2015 (6) TMI 1243 - ITAT RAIPUR] - In its aforesaid order the Tribunal had after drawing support from the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Chhattisgarh in the case of CIT Vs. Godawari Power & Ispat Ltd. (2013 (10) TMI 5 - CHHATTISGARH HIGH COURT], found favor with the claim of the assessee and observed, that the “market value” of the power supplied by the assessee to its steel division was rightly computed by considering the rate at which power was available in the open market, namely, the price that was charged by the electricity board. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations finding no merit in the declining of the assessee’s claim for deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(iv)(a) by the A.O which had rightly been vacated by the CIT(Appeals), uphold the latters order. Thus, the Grounds of appeal Nos. (a) to (c) raised by the Revenue are dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations. Disallowance of claim u/s.14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(ii) & (iii) - HELD THAT:- As the assessee company during the year under consideration had not earned any exempt income, therefore, on the said count itself no disallowance of any part of the expenditure could have been made u/s.14A of the Act. Thus no infirmity in the deletion of the disallowance under Sec. 14A by the CIT(Appeals), uphold his order. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|