Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2015 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (9) TMI 1110 - ITAT DELHIDisallowance of Expenditure in respect of approvals and permission and Expenditure on removal of squatters - CIT(A) allowed claim - Held that:- As decided in assesee's own case for AY 2007-08 for the relevant assessment year, it is noticed that the AO has changed his stand just because the assessee has transferred the complete rights in the project as a whole to M/s Purearth Infrastructure Ltd. When a particular method of computation of income of the assessee has been followed and has been accepted and is also followed by the revenue and the assessee, just because the total rights in the project has been transferred, such method cannot be changed as by the change of the method, the expenses otherwise allowable to the assessee, is now being denied which is not a permissible act. In these circumstances, we are of the view that the action of the CIT(A) in directing the AO to allow the deduction of the said expenses is on right footing and do not call any interference - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition made u/s 41(1) - payment to Builders and liability for vacation of squatters allowed in assessment years 2004-05 on accrual basis - Held that:- On identical ground for A.Y. 2007-08 the finding of the Tribunal concluded In regard to the issue of disallowance of interest on the loans outstanding from M/s DCM Employees Welfare Trust, it is noticed that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2003-04 and consequently respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for the A.Y. 2003-04, the findings of the ld. CIT(A) on this issue stand upheld. - Decided against revenue. Addition in respect of Sec.14A disallowance - Held that:- In the facts of the present case before us, the assessee has suo mote disallowed expenses under section 14A of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) has not compensated for the deficiency by the A.O in recording proper satisfaction. The ld. CIT(A) has restricted the disallowance to an extent of ₹ 9.79 lacs. The ld. CIT(A) fails to appreciate the reasonableness of expenditure that has been disallowed viz-a-viz the exempt income. In the light of the judgment of Maxopp Investments Ltd. vs. CIT (2011 (11) TMI 267 - Delhi High Court ). We, restrict the disallowance to 10.23 lacs as calculated by the assessee. In view of the aforesaid discussion and on the basis of material and evidence on record, to meet the ends of justice, we find no perversity in the calculation of 14 A, disallowance by the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|