Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (4) TMI 1137 - AT - Income TaxAllowability of deduction under sec. 80-IB(4) on sales-tax incentive - Held that:- Similar issue had come up before this Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s. Coral Clinical Systems [2015 (10) TMI 2182 - ITAT PANAJI] wherein held there is an inextricable link between the manufacturing activity, the payment of sales tax and the sales tax incentive. Therefore, in our opinion, such sales tax incentive which has been retained by the assessee from the Sales Tax collected has to be held as derived from the industrial undertaking and consequently is eligible for deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance of assets written off - claim of the assessee that writing off was strictly in accordance with sec. 43(6)(c)(i)(B) - Held that:- After considering the rival submissions and perusing the material available on record, we are of the considered opinion that if the loss on account of assets written off has not been allowed to the assessee by the Assessing Officer considering it to be a capital loss, then he should have allowed depreciation on the WDV of the assets. We, therefore, set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remand back to the file of the Assessing Officer to re-adjudicate the issue, afresh after verification as per law. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purpose. Disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D - Held that:- Question of satisfaction is provided in section 14A and rule 8D(1), that relates to the accounts of the assessee. Thus, it is not the total investment at the beginning of the year and at the end of the year, which is to be considered but it is the average of the value of investments which has given rise to the income which does not form part of the total income which is to be considered. A question may arise as to why the term "average of the value of investment" is then used. The term average of the value of investment would be to take care of cases where there is the issue of dividend striping. In any case, as we have already held that the assessee has not incurred any expenditure by way of interest during the previous year, which is not directly attributable to any particular income. As the Assessing Officer has not considered the above therefore, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remand back to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudicating the issue, afresh in the light of the observations made hereinabove after allowing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purpose.
|