|
Advanced Search Options
Case Laws
Showing 81 to 100 of 1192 Records
-
2021 (11) TMI 1113 - ITAT DELHI
Rectification u/s 254 - unexplained source of money deposited in the bank account - Sham assessee submitted wherein the confirmation with respect to M/s. Sheela Credit & Leasing Limited for payments made by the assessee was submitted, but has been ignored by the bench - HELD THAT:- No details of re-payment to M/s. Sheela Credit & Leasing Limited has been submitted. Therefore, the bench held that agreement to sell entered into by the assessee with M/s. Sheela Credit & Leasing Limited was a sham agreement and it was made just to explain the source of money deposited in the bank account of the assessee. We find that assessee has submitted letter dated 21st June, 2017 wherein assessee referred to the confirmation from that company along with the letter of confirmation dated 31st March, 2019 was also submitted.
The above letter was erroneously not considered by the co-ordinate bench. Therefore, to that extent there is an error in the order of the ITAT. The fact shows that the assessee has submitted the details of re-payment. In view of this, the claim of the assessee is found to be correct that assessee has re-paid Rs.8,40,000/- out of the total advance of Rs.15,00,000/- received by the assessee. Even as a material has not been considered by the co-ordinate bench, we hold that there is an error apparent from the record in the order of the ITAT. Thus, the order passed by the bench is recalled. The Misc. application filed by the assessee is allowed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1112 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT
Seeking release of vehicle - petitioner is ready to furnish the Bank Guarantee of the amount of tax and penalty - HELD THAT:- Subject to furnishing Bank Guarantee for payment of tax, penalty and fine in lieu of confiscation of the conveyance, pending this petition, conveyance shall be released. Once the said Bank Guarantee is furnished, within 24 hours, the release of the vehicle shall be made.
The matter is adjourned to 16.12.2021. Direct service is permitted, TODAY.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1111 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Nature of expenditure - Expenditure on construction of building - whether leasehold premises would amount to revenue expenditure contrary to the clear provisions of Explanation 1 to Section 32(1)? - HELD THAT:- As decided in case Viswams [2019 (4) TMI 1127 - MADRAS HIGH COURT]. Assesses had incurred substantial expenditure towards renovation leading to enduring benefit. They are not merely repairs. Assessee had also incurred expenditures towards improvement and construction of the building. These cannot be termed as 'repairs'. Consequently, this alternate submission is rejected by us.
The second alternate submission advanced by Mr.M.P.Senthil Kumar that the case should be remitted back to the AO is also rejected since the fact have been addressed and settled by the Authorities below and it had been concurrently found that the expenditure were capital in nature. The issue of bifurcating the said expenses as capital and revenue would therefore not arise.
We hold that the substantial questions of law have to be answered in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee and the Appeals filed by the Revenue have to be allowed. Accordingly, the Appeals are allowed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1110 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
Money Laundering - scheduled offences - Seeking grant of bail - bail sought on the ground of serious and deadly ailments - Section 120B, 418, 420, 421, 467, 471 IPC - HELD THAT:- It is clear that initially the FIR was registered in which the co-ordinate bench of this Court on 13.08.2018 bailed out the applicant and during his arrest, the E.D. on 11.09.2017 moved the present complaint bearing no ECIR/01/ALSZO/2017 and re-affected his arrest on 10.11.2020 and since then he is in jail. During this period, the Department is progressing its investigation with snail's speed but seems to have filed the charge sheet. The ailing applicant is behind the bars under trial for last more than year. So far as apprehension of fleeing away is concerned, seems to be unfounded and without any basis.
The Enforcement Directorate is at the fullest liberty to make seizure the applicant's GREY accounts after grilling him as per the law. But, he cannot be put behind the bars for unlimited period.
The applicant is entitled for bail keeping in view that he is suffering from deadly ailments of Cancer and accordingly, the applicant-Kamal Ahsan be released on bail in the case on furnishing a personal bond of Rs.25 lacs and two sureties to the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court with the conditions imposed - application allowed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1109 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Constitutional Validity of Explanation to Section 65(105) of the Finance Act, 1994 and Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 as introduced by the Finance Act, 2005 and Notification No. 23/2005-S.T., dated 7-6-2005 - vires of Articles 19(1)(g), 245 and 265 of the Constitution of India.
HELD THAT:- The issue involved herein is covered by the judgment of this Court in UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THE CHAIRMAN CENTRAL BOARD OF EXCISE AND CUSTOMS, THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF CENTRAL EXCISE VERSUS M/S. WHEELS INDIA LTD. [2018 (1) TMI 1697 - MADRAS HIGH COURT], in which, the Division Bench of this Court, after following the Supreme Court decision in UNION OF INDIA VERSUS INDIAN NATIONAL SHIPOWNERS ASSOCIATION [2009 (12) TMI 850 - SC ORDER], dismissed the writ appeal.
Appeal dismissed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1108 - CESTAT BANGALORE
CENVAT Credit - scope of input and input service - period prior to as well as after 1-4-2011 - HELD THAT:- The definition of “Input” contained in Rule 2(k) ibid provided that all goods, excepting the excluded category of goods, should be considered as input for the purpose of availment of the Cenvat benefit. On perusal of the case records vis-à-vis the definition clause, it is found that the disputed inputs in this case were not falling under the excluded category of goods itemized in the said Rule - the disputed goods utilized by the appellant prior to 1-4-2011 should be considered as “Input” for availing the benefit of Cenvat credit - this Tribunal in the case of M/s. Millennia Realtors Private Limited (who is also an appellant in this case) [2020 (3) TMI 624 - CESTAT BANGALORE], has extended the Cenvat benefit on the similar inputs availed by the appellant, considering the same as input in terms of the definition provided under Rule 2(k) ibid.
Cenvat credit on the input services prior to the period 1-4-2011 - HELD THAT:- The definition of “Input Service” contained in Rule 2(l) ibid provided that “activities relating to business” should be considered as input service for the purpose of availment of the benefit of Cenvat facility. In this case, the Department has not raised any objection that the appellants had availed the input services for accomplishing their business purpose. Hence, under such circumstances, denial of Cenvat benefit on the input services availed by the appellant prior to the period 1-4-2011 cannot be denied solely on the ground that the disputed services are not categorised as input services.
Cenvat credit on the input services for the period after 1-4-2011 - HELD THAT:- The definition clause provided under Rule 2(l) ibid clearly provided that any service used by a provider of taxable service for providing an output service should be considered as input service. The definition clause has provided the excluded category of services, which cannot be considered as input service. On careful examination of the case records, it is found that the list of disputed services itemized in the SCNs as well as in the impugned order are not conforming to the excluded category of services finding place in the definition clause. Thus, denial of Cenvat benefit on the disputed services availed by the appellants after 1-4-2011 by the authorities below is not legal and proper and accordingly, the impugned orders are liable to be set aside.
The Learned AR submitted that the appellant had not provided any evidence to show that some of the disputed services are used for the construction activities. However, on a query from the Bench as to whether the Original Authority had recorded such findings in the impugned order, he replied negatively.
There are no merits in the impugned orders, insofar as the adjudged demands were confirmed on the appellant, holding that they should not be eligible for the Cenvat benefit - appeal allowed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1107 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
LTCG on sale of rights in land - action of the lower authorities in invoking the provisions of section 50C and in substituting some other valuation was clearly beyond the provisions of law as applicable upon the impugned transaction. Under these transactions, we hereby delete the addition made by the AO - HELD THAT:- The Order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) [2017 (1) TMI 1325 - ITAT MUMBAI] is quashed and set aside.
The matter is remanded for denovo consideration on the four grounds as raised by respondent in its appeal for A.Y.- 2010-2011.
The ITAT shall give a finding on all the four grounds. ITAT shall complete the hearing and pass an order on or before 31st March 2022. Appeal disposed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1106 - ITAT DELHI
Addition u/s 68 - assessee company has received share premium and the shareholders were not found at their respective addresses and the assessee could not produce the directors of the investor companies - assessments u/s 143(3) of the Act of the share subscriber companies were completed - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- We find from the various details furnished by the assessee in the paper book that it has filed the master data of all the investor companies as downloaded from the MCA website, therefore, we find merit in the argument of the ld. Counsel that the Revenue cannot allege that the investor companies are bogus when the assessments u/s 143(3) of the Act of the subscriber companies were completed by the Income-tax Department during the same period.
The entire amount had been received by the assessee company through normal banking channel by account payee cheques or demand drafts, majority of the investment companies are assessed u/s 143(3) of the Act and nothing was brought on record by the Revenue that either these orders were subject to reopening u/s 147 or set aside u/s 263 of the IT act.
It is also to be noted that this is the first year of incorporation of the company and, therefore, it cannot be said that the assessee company has brought in its own unaccounted funds through these investor companies as bogus share capital or share premium. Further, it has been held in various decisions relied on by ld. Counsel that when identity, credit worthiness and genuineness of the transaction is not in doubt, then, addition cannot be made just because the assessee could not produce the directors of the subscriber companies or when the share applicants were not found at their addresses.
Once genuineness, credit worthiness and identity of investors are established and whose assessments were completed u/s 143(3) at almost the same time, then, no addition can be made on account of unexplained share capital/premium. In this view of the matter and in view of the detailed reasoning given by the ld.CIT(A) while deleting the addition, we do not find any infirmity in his order - Decided in favour of assessee.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1105 - CUSTOMS AUTHORITY FOR ADVANCE RULINGS, MUMBAI
Classification of imported goods - Networking Device Model No. D5N83A - to be classified under sub-heading 8517 62 90 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975 or not - HELD THAT:- The product under consideration, therefore, appears to perform the function of reception, conversion and transmission in all three different scenarios. The first rule of interpretation of customs tariff is that goods under consideration should be classified in accordance with the terms of the heading or relevant section or chapter notes. Since, the applicant, as well as the Principal Commissioner/Commissioner of Customs of ACC (Import), Delhi; ACC (Import), Mumbai, ACC, Chennai; and Sea Port, Chennai all suggest that the Heading 8517 62 is an appropriate classification entry for the device under consideration. Tariff Item 8517 includes ‘Telephone sets, including telephones for cellular networks or for other wireless networks; other apparatus for the transmission or reception of voice, images or other data, including apparatus for communication in a wired or wireless network (such as a local or wide area network), other than transmission or reception apparatus of Heading 8443, 8525, 8527 or 8528.’.
Considering the fact that the utility of the devices under consideration ultimately lies in their ability to provide content for view on a television set, the alternate tariff entry for these goods can be 8525 (TRANSMISSION APPARATUS FOR RADIO-BROADCASTING OR TELEVISION, WHETHER OR NOT INCORPORATION RECEPTION APPARATUS OR SOUND RECORDING OR REPRODUCING APPARATUS; TELEVISION CAMERAS, DIGITAL CAMERAS AND VIDEO CAMERA RECORDERS), was also examined, but rejected in view of the fact that the network devices under consideration do not transmit radio/video broadcast signals.
Networking Device Model No. D5N83A is correctly classifiable under sub-heading 8517 62 90 of the first schedule to the Customs Tariff Act, 1975.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1104 - ITAT JAIPUR
TDS u/s 194C OR 194J - short deduction of tax and for interest u/s 201(1A) imposed - payments made for supply and installation of computers, commissioning of computer laboratories and technical manpower and to Vimal Electronics for supply and installation of solar photo voltaic panels - HELD THAT:- Entire contract is for supply of computer hardware, software, connected accessories, UPS, furniture, stationary, consumables, etc., and this contract is to be carried out by the contract through its own personnel. Thus, it is a simple contract of carrying out a work. Section 194J applies to a person responsible for paying to any resident any sum by way of fees for professional/technical services. In the present case, the contractor has not made available any technical services to the assessee but has only provided the computer hardware, software, etc., and employed his own personnel for implementing the same in various schools as per the terms and conditions of the contract. Hence, section 194J is not applicable and the assessee has rightly deducted tax at source under section 194C.
We draw strength from the decision of Senior Manager (Finance), Bharat Heavy Electricals Ltd. [2016 (12) TMI 955 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] where contract was for erection, installation, commissioning, testing and trail operations of various equipment and other related machinery and that under the terms of the contract it was the duty of the contractor to provide all type of labour, supervisors, engineers, inspectors, etc., for execution of the project, the AO held that section 194J is applicable as the level of human interaction was high and sophisticated. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) however held that the scope of the work given to the sub-contractor did not fall in the scope of technical services merely because technical persons were employed in execution of contract and therefore, tax is deductible only under section 194C.
No professional or technical services were rendered to the assessee rather the persons were employed by the parties for execution of the contract and thus tax is deductible under section 194C of the Act. While reaching to this conclusion, we also relied upon the decision in the case of Rajasthan Council of Elementary Education wherein on the same facts, it was held that the agreement is a contract for carrying out a work and therefore, taxes required to be deducted at source under section 194C and not under section 194J of the Act, therefore, we direct to delete the addition. Hence, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1103 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Disallowance of depreciation on the capital assets which according to the Revenue were not existing or available for verification - HELD THAT:- The facts on record clearly establish that the assessee company came into existence upon the conversion of the State Electricity Board into five electricity distribution companies. The assets and liabilities were distributed amongst these five companies and in the process the assessee received certain assets. The cost of acquisition of the transferer company as well as the written down value were reflected in the books of accounts required to be statutorily maintained and audited. As pointed out by the counsel for the assessee, such assets would include machinery and other hardware even inspection of which would not be easy for the Assessing Officer. However only on the ground that such assets were not immediately available for physical verification the claim of depreciation could not have been disallowed. No question of law arises. This question is therefore not entertained.
Disallowance of prior period expenses - HELD THAT:- It is undisputed position that the issue is covered against the department by the judgment of this Court and against which the Revenue had abandoned the appeals before the Supreme Court. In that view of the matter, this question is not entertained without recording independent reasons.
Applicability of Section 115JB to the assessee Electricity Company - HELD THAT:- We notice that other High Courts have under similar circumstances come to the conclusion that the said provisions prior to its amendment in the year 2012, would not cover the electricity company. The Kerela High Court in case of Kerela State Electricity Board [2010 (11) TMI 127 - KERALA HIGH COURT] had taken such a view in similar circumstances. Thus question No.3 is also not entertained.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1102 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT
Seeking grant of bail - evasion of GST - issuance of fake invoices without actual supply and receipt of goods - scope and ambit of Section 132 read with Section 69 of the Central Goods and Service Tax Act, 2017 - HELD THAT:- In the facts and circumstances of the case, it is opined that the Petitioner No.2 is not co-operating in the investigation and was required to be issued summons eight times. Even otherwise, assuming such blanket direction can be issued, it ought to be issued in rarest of rare cases and is not at all warranted in the facts of the present case.
The issue of constitutionality of sections 69 and 132 of the CGST Act is now pending before the Apex Court. Leaving the remedies of Petitioner No.2 to seek reliefs before the appropriate forum open, the prayer for grant of ad-interim relief is rejected.
List the Petition on 8th December, 2021.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1101 - ITAT DELHI
TP Adjustment - selection of MAM - addition to the returned income of the appellant by re-computing the arm's length price (ALP) of the international transactions under section 92 - rejection of internal TNMM applied by the assessee - HELD THAT:- DRP was not correct in considering the services/scope of work from the agreement entered into by the assessee with its AE for ‘procurement of IT Services’ and comparing the same with the back-end ITeS Services provided by the assessee to AEs. In the present case best suited method is that of internal TNMM. The financial data pertaining to internal segmentation is more reliable and accurate, as compared to financial data of external comparable companies, therefore, it will be appropriate to apply internal benchmarking analysis over external benchmarking analysis. This finds support from the “OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administrations” which highlight the preference of internal comparables over external comparables.
In fact, the United Nations Practical Manual on Transfer Pricing for Developing Countries, released in 2013 (UN manual) also provides that TNMM is less dependent on product comparability because net margins are less influenced by differences in products and functions, as compare to other methods like CUP. Therefore, we direct the TPO/AO to adopt internal TNMM for benchmarking provision of ITeS. Ground Nos. 4 and 5 are allowed.
Adjustment on account of notional interest on receivables - HELD THAT:- It is pertinent to note that the assessee is admitting that the business model of the assessee is such that receivables as well as payables are generally outstanding with both the AEs and non AEs for a period exceeding one month. But the contention of the Ld. AR that this is purely because of business reasons and it was not with an intention to extent indirect credit facility to the debts or obtain credit facility from creditors is not sustainable. Hence, we find that the DRP has rightly directed the TPO to compute the adjustment applying the rate of LIBOR plus 400 basis points on receivables due from its AE in US$ for the year under consideration. There is no need to interfere with the said directions. Hence, Ground No. 9 and 10 are dismissed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1100 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Bogus purchases - AO on account of information received from Maharashtra Sales Tax Authorities - HELD THAT:- There is no other material with the Revenue to corroborate the information so received from the Sales Tax Department in order to make the impugned addition nor established that the so-called bogus purchase or the sum equivalent thereof was returned to the assessee in any manner. It appears from the record that no internal inquiry has been carried out by the Revenue to vouch the fact of bogus purchases.
CIT(A) has recorded that the appellant has submitted documentary evidence to establish the genuineness of purchase made from the parties, but the factum of the said billings parties being engaged in the bogus bills was not ruled out. Accordingly, after examining all the facts and circumstances and also relying upon decision on similar issue, he restricted the impugned addition and estimated the same at 10% of alleged bogus purchases - We do not find any infirmity in the approach of the ld.CIT(A) in restricting the impugned additions, and therefore, his order does not warrant our intervention in this score. We confirm the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the Revenue.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1099 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT
Condonation of delay - delay of 750 days in filing the appeal - as submitted by appellant that initially the Department was of the view that the matter being of low tax effect, appeal cannot be preferred. But subsequently it came to light that in terms of the Circular issued by the CBDT in matters relating to Short Term Capital Gains/Long Term Capital Gains, appeals have to be filed even if the tax effect is below the threshold limit.
HELD THAT:- After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, we are of view that the reason assigned by the petitioner for not being able to file the appeal earlier is acceptable. Therefore, we exercise the discretion and condone the delay in filing the appeal. The application for condonation of delay is allowed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1098 - ITAT CHANDIGARH
Denial of exemption u/s 11 - Assessee earned income only by way of interest on FDRs and the expenditure incurred were related to administration expenses only - as per AO Income and expenditure account reflected no charitable activity carried out by the assessee contended that the facts reflected in the financial statements though not denied, do not reflect the complete picture and the factum of having carried out charitable activity nor can it be culled out from the said statement alone - HELD THAT:- As noted by the ITAT in its order in earlier year, as above, that the assessee had only been indulging in construction activity since its creation for a very long period of around 8-10 years, had never itself run the medical facility despite a part of it being completed in the year 2000 and had in fact earlier on decided to lease out the running of its medical facility to a private party in PPP mode, and considering the order of the ITAT in the backdrop of the aforesaid facts, holding that the assessee never intended to carry out its stated charitable activity of running the medical college and hospital, and further in view of our findings above that the assessee had virtually sold its facility by leasing it out for 99 years and having no substantial control over it, we have no hesitation in agreeing with the CIT(A) that vis a vis the medical facility being run in PPP mode the assessee cannot be said to be carrying out any charitable activity.
Other contention of assessee that it had amended its objects in 2009 and included therein funding of various medical projects in Government Medical College and Hospitals in Punjab and to which effect it had contributed over the years substantial sum of money, the Ld. DR has pointed out the fallacy in this argument of assessee by drawing our attention to the Memorandum of Understanding the assessee society had entered into with Baba Farid University, filed alongwith submissions of the assessee dated 9/7/2019, where the assessee has contended to have utilized its funds for medical upgradation in the hospital run by it.
DR has pointed out that it was not simplicitor funding of projects in the hospital as claimed by the assessee, but in fact in the nature of investment in the hospital. The Memorandum of Understanding, he pointed out, required revenue sharing between the assessee and Baba Farid University in the ratio 60:40 or 80:20 of the net receipts earned from the project.
As perused the documents and find the contention of the Ld.DR with regards to Revenue sharing arrangement entered into with respect to the amount invested in Baba Farid University of Health and Sciences, to be correct. Even otherwise the Ld.Counsel for the assessee was unable to contradict the same. It is clear, therefore, there is not merit in the claim of the assessee that it was indulging in charitable activities by way of funding medical projects in Government hospitals as it was nothing but a commercial transaction by the assessee society.
Thus we hold, agreeing with the Revenue, that the assessee society was not indulging in carrying out any charitable activities worth its name during the year but on the contrary was only earning income by non charitable activities, earning from investments made by it in FDR’s or other medical institutes. The assessee, we hold, has therefore been rightly held to be not entitled to exemption u/s 11 of the Act. The order of the Ld.CIT(A) is, therefore, upheld. The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are dismissed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1097 - DELHI HIGH COURT
When can an investigation be stated to commence under PMLA? - Who and at what stage can be termed as an accused? - Whether ECIR can be treated as an FIR for the applicability of CrPC provisions and for testing the invasion of any of the constitutional rights available to persons accused of a crime?
HELD THAT:- In view of the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court is seized of the matter in relation to the issue which is raised in the present petition, list these petitions on 11th February, 2022.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1096 - MADRAS HIGH COURT
Non remittance of TDS deducted by the employer from its employees to the Income Tax Department within the time prescribed - HELD THAT:- This Court following the dictum rendered in Madhumillan Syntex Ltd., Vs. Union of India[2007 (3) TMI 670 - SUPREME COURT] dismissed the petitions with liberty to the petitioners to seek for dispensation of their personal appearance on except the essential hearing dates.
This Court is of the view that the same order to be passed in the present case as well. This Petition is dismissed with liberty to the petitioners to approach the trial Court to dispense with their personal appearance as and when required. Consequently, connected Miscellaneous Petition is closed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1095 - NATIONAL COMPANY LAW TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI
Sale of the MV. VM Hopper Barge - violative of the moratorium imposed under section 14 of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 or not - Preferential, Undervalued & Fraudulent Transaction or not - reversal of the sale of the MV. VM Hopper Barge - seeking restraint on Respondents, their officers, servants, agents, assignees, and successors in office from in any way alienating or creating any further third-party rights in respect of MV.VM Hopper Barge.
HELD THAT:- It is borne out from record that the Vessel HV. VM Hopper Barge H-107 against which the Respondent No.2 is having primary charge has been disposed of by Respondent No. 2 under SARFAESI proceedings to the Respondent No.3 out of liquidation process and the Respondent No.3 has already taken physical possession by paying the entire sale consideration and also obtained sale certificate in their favour from Respondent No.2 - It is also an admitted fact that the present Applicant had filed Securitization Application before the Debt Recovery Tribunal-II, Mumbai challenging the possession notice issued under the SARFAESI Act by Respondent No.2 and the matter is subjudice before the competent DRT and the DRT has refused to grant any stay to the applicant.
As rightly contended by the Respondent No.2, the Applicant has already approached the Competent DRT challenging the SARFAESI measure initiated by Respondent No.2 and the proceedings are pending. The issue as to whether the sale conducted by the Respondent No.2 in respect of Vessel is hit under Section 31 (d) of the SARFEASI Act or not can be decided by DRT. The Applicant cannot continue simultaneous proceedings both in NCLT and DRT Especially without any locus. Since the above application is not filed by the IRP or RP and since this Bench is inclined to dismiss the above application on the locus of the applicant, this Bench is not giving any findings on the other issues raised by the petitioner.
Application dismissed.
-
2021 (11) TMI 1094 - ITAT PUNE
Disallowance u/s.14A r.w.r. 8D - Necessity of recording satisfaction - HELD THAT:- Since the facts and circumstances on this issue for the year under consideration are similar to those of earlier years [2019 (12) TMI 627 - ITAT PUNE], respectfully following the precedent and specifically noting that the AO did record satisfaction in the assessment order, as further elaborated by the ld. CIT(A) in the impugned order, we hold that due satisfaction was recorded. Insofar as the calculation of disallowance at 0.5% under Rule 8D(2)(iii) is concerned, it is seen that the assessee itself computed such amount during the course of assessment proceedings and placed the same before the AO. To sum up, the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed.
Nature of receipt - capital or revenue receipt - taxability of receipt by the assessee under Package Scheme of Incentives (PSI) 2001 as revenue receipt chargeable to tax - HELD THAT:- The Hon’ble Bombay High court in Pr. CIT Vs. M/s. Welspun Steel Ltd. [2019 (3) TMI 397 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has taken similar view in deciding question no. (b) raised before it and held that the Tribunal was justified in holding that subsidy cannot be considered as a payment directly or indirectly to meet any portion of the actual cost. The assessee in that case also got subsidy for industrial development. Similar view has also been taken in M/s. Alkoplus Producers Pvt. Ltd. and Another [2019 (4) TMI 558 - ITAT PUNE] - It is overt that subsidy, in the prevailing circumstances, does not qualify for reduction from the cost of assets in pursuance of Explanation 10 to section 43(1) of the Act. We, therefore, overturn the alternative view also as canvassed in the impugned order on this score. This ground is allowed.
Allowability of Aircraft expenses - CIT(A) upheld the disallowance at 25% of the gross amount of expenses - HELD THAT:- While sustaining the disallowance, the ld. CIT(A) took gross figures of aircraft expenses. The assessee has placed on record a calculation showing that out of total expenses of Rs.560.06 lakh the assessee recovered a sum of Rs.344.80 lakh from outside parties etc., leading the net amount of expenses at Rs.215.26 lakh. The disallowance is, therefore, directed to be restricted to 15% of the net expenses after verification of the calculation shown by the assessee - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
Disallowance of Provision made for warranty - CIT(A) allowed part relief by restricting the disallowance - HELD THAT:- similar issue arose for consideration before the Tribunal in the earlier years. A copy of the Tribunal order for the assessment year 2011-12 2019 (12) TMI 627 - ITAT PUNE] has been placed on record, which shows that the assessee’s claim has been accepted in entirety for the amount of provision created by it. Respectfully following the precedent, we allow the assessee’s ground and dismiss that of the Revenue.
Disallowance of weighted deduction claimed u/s.35(2AB) - assessee claimed the weighted deduction - Department of Scientific and Industrial Research (DSIR), New Delhi approving authority, reduced the amount of eligible deduction - HELD THAT:- Amount of weighted deduction should be allowed in entirety irrespective of the fact that it was not approved by the DSIR, subject to verification of the claim by the AO in terms of the afore referred judgment of SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES LTD. [2017 (8) TMI 933 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT].
Depreciation at 60% on Printers, UPS and other allied items - HELD THAT:- It is seen that similar issue came up for consideration before the Tribunal for the assessment year 2011-12 [2019 (12) TMI 627 - ITAT PUNE]. Relevant discussion has been made at page 54 of the paper book in which the opinion of the ld. CIT(A), in increasing the rate of depreciation, has been upheld. Respectfully following the same, we dismiss this ground.
Addition u/s.40A(2) on account of commission paid to Directors - AO treated the payment to Directors as excessive to this extent as per the mandate of section 40A(2), which was deleted in the first appeal - HELD THAT:- As seen that similar issue came up for consideration before the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2011-12. Respectfully following the precedent, we uphold the impugned order on this score.
........
|
