- 2017 (3) TMI 1832 - ITAT MUMBAI
Disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) - indirect expenditure for earning exempt income - HELD THAT:- Calculation of disallowance as per Rule 8D(2)(iii) is erroneous, as the AO without assigning any reason did not reduce the investment in mutual funds and group concern which does not quire incurrence of major expenditure.We restore this ground back to the file of A.O. for fresh consideration. As we have restored the appeals of the Assessee, we also restore the appeals of the revenue to the file of the Assessing Officer who shall consider the submissions of the Assessee that the dividend income from the investments in HDFC Mutual Fund (Growth Plan) is taxable when the dividend is received and also the capital gains is attracted for the gain received on sale of these investments. AO should also consider as to whether investment in f....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1831 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Levy of fee u/s. 234E in order u/s. 200A - appellant has filed TDS statement u/s. 200(3) beyond the prescribed due date - HELD THAT:- As case of Tanish Industries Pvt Ltd [2015 (11) TMI 1507 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] adjustment in respect of levy of fees under section 234E was indeed beyond the scope of permissible adjustments contemplated under section 200A. The impugned levy of fees under section 234 E is unsustainable in law. We, therefore, uphold the grievance of the assessee and delete the impugned levy of fee under section 234E of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee.
- 2017 (3) TMI 1828 - ITAT JAIPUR
Excess stock found during the survey - partner of the assessee firm admitted that the investment had been made out of undisclosed sources - Suddenly in the books of accounts, the assessee has incorporated this transaction by debiting the purchase account and crediting the income from undisclosed sources - HELD THAT:- The net effect of this double entry accounting treatment is that firstly the unrecorded stock of rice has been brought on the books and now forms part of the recorded stock which can be subsequently sold out and the profit/loss therefrom would be subject to tax as any other normal business transaction. Secondly, the unrecorded investment which has gone in purchase of such unrecorded stock of rice has been recorded in the books of accounts and offered to tax by crediting the said amount in the profit and loss account. Had this....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1827 - ITAT CHENNAI
LTCG Computation under section 50C - Valuation of property - Additional capital gain made by invoking the provisions of section 50C - refer the matter before the DVO - value adopted by the DRO - HELD THAT:- Before confronting the fair market value adopted by the SRO as higher, the assessee has not directly approached the AO to refer the matter before the DVO to determine the fair market value, but against the value adopted by the SRO, the assessee has appealed before another authority i.e., District Revenue Officer (Stamps), Chennai. Against the value determined by the District Revenue Officer (Stamps), Chennai, which was adopted as market value of the property by the SRO, neither the Department nor the Tribunal can alter or modify the value. The dispute over the valuation of market value ended with Revenue authorities of the State Govern....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1825 - ITAT CHENNAI
Monetary limit to file appeal - low tax effect - Revenue has filed the present Miscellaneous Petition on the ground that the Circular No.21/2015 of CBDT is not applicable to the appeal of the Revenue - Reopening of assessment on audit objection disallowing expenditure paid to Cochin Port Trust, for non-deduction of tax - HELD THAT:- AO reopened the assessment u/s 147 on the basis of audit objection and disallowed an expenditure being the sum paid to Cochin Port Trust towards port charges. Admittedly, the appeal was not filed on the basis of audit objection. The assessment was reopened on the basis of audit objection. On perusal of the approval granted by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax under Rule 15 of Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963, it appears that the appeal was filed in the regular course and not on the basis of audit objectio....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1824 - ITAT AHMEDABAD
Penalty u/s 271E - Non recording of satisfaction regarding initiation of penalty proceedings - HELD THAT:- Assessment Order there is no mention about initiation of any penalty proceedings in connection with the impugned penalty. In this view of the matter and respectfully following case of CIT vs. Jai Laxmi Rice Mills [2015 (11) TMI 1453 - SUPREME COURT] delete the impugned penalty. - Decided in favour of assessee.
- 2017 (3) TMI 1823 - ITAT MUMBAI
Disallowance of excess claim of depreciation - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2014 (5) TMI 926 - ITAT MUMBAI] direct the AO to allow the depreciation on the machinery that had been acquired from Bilag, and also include incidental expenses incurred on acquisition of assets. Depreciation on goodwill - HELD THAT:- As decided in own case [2014 (5) TMI 926 - ITAT MUMBAI] relying on Smifs Securities Ltd. [2012 (8) TMI 713 - SUPREME COURT] - intangibles like goodwill are eligible for depreciation - non compete fee is in the nature of the payment and is now covered u/s 28(va) of the Act, it would be revenue in nature - AO is directed to allow the depreciation on goodwill as per law and consider the payment of non-compete fee, in terms of section 28(va) - Decided in favour of Assessee.
- 2017 (3) TMI 1822 - ITAT COCHIN
Deduction u/s 80P - assessee was in the business of banking and section 80P(4) stood attracted and disallowed the claim of the assessee u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) - CIT(A), by relying on the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Chirakkal Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. v. CIT 2016 (4) TMI 826 - KERALA HIGH COURT accepted the claim of the assessee u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) - HELD THAT:- Assessee having produced the certificate which clearly indicated its nature as a primary agricultural credit society, in our opinion, section 80P(4) could not have been invoked for denying the claim u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) - We cannot find fault with the order of the CIT(A). As for the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Perithalmanna Service Co-operative Bank vs. CIT 2014 (6) TMI 184 - KERALA HIGH COURT relied on by Ld........ + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1819 - ITAT CHENNAI
Interest accrued on NPA - Accrual of income - HELD THAT:- Assessee was bound to follow classification of NPA in accordance with prudential norms prescribed by Reserve Bank of India. It is not disputed that the assessee had not shown any income accrual of interest on non-performing assets in its accounts. Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Deogiri Nagari Sahakari Bank Ltd. [2015 (1) TMI 1218 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] held that Tribunal has rightly dealt with this issue and observed that, unclaimed dividend in question amounts to excess provisions for dividend made by the Assessee on an earlier occasion which has been reversed by the Assessee in the year under consideration and transferred to a reserve account. The provisions for dividend made earlier was not a charge action profits but it was appropriation of the profits available pos....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1818 - ITAT MUMBAI
Bogus purchases - CIT(A) upholding the adhoc addition being 40% - HELD THAT:- Materials were received and sold and duly accounted for and therefore it is not the case where the accommodation entries were taken to suppress the income of the assessee. Purchases made by the assessee stand proved. Disallowance as sustained by the FAA appears to be unreasonable and excessive and therefore cannot be sustained. In order to plug the leakages of revenue due to the possibility of purchasing goods from the gray market as generally the case is and thus savings made on account of sales tax, octroi and other charges, some reasonable addition should be made. Reasonable to sustain the addition @5% of the total purchases to cover and compensate for the saving made by the assessee by making purchases from grey market. Accordingly, we set aside the order of the ld.CIT(A) and direct the AO to made the addition @ 5% in place of 40% by the ld CIT of bogus purchases. - Decided partly in favour of assessee.
- 2017 (3) TMI 1817 - ITAT MUMBAI
Revision u/s 263 - as per CIT assessee could not have claimed depreciation on plant and machinery given on lease and since the assessee has not reduced the lease value of plant and machinery from block of assets, therefore, the assessee has claimed excess depreciation - HELD THAT:- Not only specific query was raised by the AO but also detailed reply has been made on the basis of which the AO has framed the assessment and allowed the depreciation on the leased asset . It cannot be held that in the light of this record, the AO has not applied his mind or there is any lack of inquiry made by the AO on the impugned issue. When, the AO has applied his mind on the given facts and material on record which has been specifically required by him, then it cannot be held that the AO has passed the assessment order without any application of mind. Onc....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1813 - ITAT MUMBAI
Deduction claimed u/s 24(a) disallowed - Rent income should be treated as income from house property OR Business income - HELD THAT:- No details were furnished by assessee till 17/07/2014. Some statements regarding the queries raised by ld CIT(A) were filed by assessee on 28/08/2014, from which the facts were not verifiable as to which are the asset used for Marine training. CIT(A) concluded that assessee company executed two agreements , one in respect of buildings and other in respect of furniture and fixture. The assessee company derived the benefits claiming depreciation all the years and now has changed the head the income only to claim standard deduction u/s 24(a) which is higher than the depreciation comparative to repairs and maintenance. Assessee has not filed copy of Memorandum of Association of Assessee Company for the reasons ....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1808 - ITAT INDORE
Disallowance of interest on advances given treating it to be non business expenditure - Sufficiency of own funds - AO found that the assessee has advanced interest bearing funds to some of persons from which either no interest is charged or the same is charged at lesser rate whereas the assessee has paid interest @ 12% on loan taken - HELD THAT:- Interest-free advance were given out of interest-free funds available with the assessee during the year for which sufficient interest-free funds were available. Therefore, we are of the view that the Ld. A.O. has failed to establish that interest free advances to above stated four parties were out of interest bearing funds. We find that the AO has not been able to establish the nexus between interest bearing funds utilized for non business purpose In the present case, the sufficient interest free....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1807 - ITAT KOLKATA
Interest subsidy received by the assessee under TUFS - Revenue or capital receipt - HELD THAT:- Identical subsidy under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme 2000 was held to be capital receipt not chargeable to tax by this tribunal in the case of DCIT vs PWC Pvt. Ltd. [2016 (7) TMI 1052 - ITAT KOLKATA] . Following the aforesaid decisions we hold that the receipt of subsidy under the West Bengal Incentive Scheme 2000 is a capital receipt not chargeable to tax. Accordingly ground no.1 raised by the revenue is dismissed. Set off of loss being unabsorbed depreciation of 100% EOU eligible for deduction u/s. 10B against profit on non-eligible unit - HELD THAT:- Admittedly under the provision of section 10B(8) of the Act the assessee had not claimed the benefit of deduction u/s 10B of the Act and the letter of the Assessee in this regard filed in th....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1806 - ITAT CHENNAI
TP Adjustment - downward adjustment made by the Ld. TPO in respect of the international transactions - assessee to justify its claim for having received services from Associated Enterprises, whereas it was observed that many of the services were duplicative in nature as the assessee failed to explain how payments were made to its employees as well as its Associated Enterprises - DRP emphasized that the assessee company has failed to produce any documents to substantiate the claims and the Ld. TPO has consider the information and observed that the assessee has not cooperated in submitting the correct data - HELD THAT:- We are in consonance with the facts that the Associated Enterprises rendered services and the payments have been made by the assessee company though assessee could not substantiate it due to various reasons on the claim, we ....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1804 - ITAT VISAKHAPATNAM
Levy of fee u/s 234E - late filing of quarterly e-TDS return u/s 200(3) - HELD THAT:- After analysis of the provisions of section 200A & 234E of the Act and further by relied upon certain judicial precedents including the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Alom Extrusions Ltd. (2009 (11) TMI 27 - SUPREME COURT) and Rajeender Kumar Vs. CIT (2013 (7) TMI 454 - DELHI HIGH COURT) held that though sub-clause (c) inserted from 1.6.2015, it being declaratory and creative in nature, can be applied retrospectively, accordingly, the provisions of section 234E of the Act being the machinery section is applicable for levy of late fee for belated filing of TDS statements, even before insertion of sub-clause (c) in section 200A of the Act, by the Finance Act, 2015 w.e.f. 1.6.2015. Respectfully following the decision of coordinat....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1802 - ITAT HYDERABAD
Deduction u/s. 80P - HELD THAT:- Since in this case even though assessee is not involved in trading but is engaged in contract works, which included material being supplied by the Government, assessee is eligible for claim u/s. 80P(2)(a)(vi). No other contrary judgment has been brought to my notice. Respectfully following the principles laid down in M/s. Uralungal Labour Contract [2009 (10) TMI 890 - KERALA HIGH COURT] direct the AO to allow the deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(vi), as being allowed in earlier years also. Grounds are allowed.
- 2017 (3) TMI 1801 - ITAT PUNE
Condonation of delay filling Rectification application - whether the assessee has a good case of condonation of delay in filing the appeal late by about 1305 days? - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Improvement Trust, Ludhiana Vs. Ujagar Singh & Ors [2010 (6) TMI 660 - SUPREME COURT] had considered the case of delay of 90 days and had held that in case where the delay was not huge, the same could have been condoned without putting the respondent to harm or prejudices. Applying the above principle, we dismiss the condonation application filed by assessee. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed on preliminary issue itself. When there is any mistake apparent from record, the same may be rectified, when it is either pointed out by the assessee or comes to the knowledge of the authority concerned. ....... + More
- 2017 (3) TMI 1797 - ITAT MUMBAI
Gain on cancellation of forward foreign exchange contracts - Characterization of income capital gain OR Income from Other sources - HELD THAT:- As could be seen from the material on record, the only issue in dispute between the parties is in relation to the status of gain derived from the forward foreign exchange contract, whether to be assessed as capital gain or income from other sources. Undisputedly, this is a recurring dispute between the assessee and the department from earlier assessment years and in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2001-02 [2012 (12) TMI 1195 - ITAT MUMBAI] has held that income arising from forward foreign exchange contract is assessable under the head “Capital gains”. Hence we hold that the gains arising from forward foreign exchange contract are assessable under the head “Capital gain” and not as “Income from other sources”. Hence, grounds raised by the department on this issue are dismissed.
- 2017 (3) TMI 1795 - ITAT INDORE
Deduction u/s 80P - interest income from fixed deposits with the Banks and interest from Savings bank Account - HELD THAT:- As relying on own case [2012 (2) TMI 689 - ITAT INDORE] and MALAD SAHAKARI BANK LTD., MUMBAI [2011 (9) TMI 1195 - ITAT MUMBAI] assessee was eligible for deduction under section 80-P(2)(a)(i) of the Act on the interest income from fixed deposits with the Banks and interest from Savings bank Account. We, therefore, confirm the order of the learned CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds of appeal of the Revenue.
