Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (3) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (3) TMI 1160 - AT - Income TaxGovernment subsidy receipt - revenue or capital - HELD THAT:- Since no change of facts or law could be pointed out by the Revenue on this issue which has been decided in assessee’s own case for A.Y 2011-12 wherein the Ld. CIT(A) has held that sales tax incentive enjoyed by the assessee was for setting up industry in the backward areas in the State and hence it is a Capital Receipt not taxable as per the provisions of the Act and the case law relied by the A.O in the case of Sahany Steel & Press Works Limited [1997 (9) TMI 3 - SUPREME COURT] has also been considered by the Tribunal in the above case of assessee on this issue, we respectfully follow the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y 2011-12 , we confirm the order of Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss both grounds of appeal. Employee’s contribution to PF/ESI which was not paid before the due date - HELD THAT:- We note that the Ld. CIT(A) allowed the grounds of appeal of the assessee on this issue by relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Vijay Shree Ltd. [2011 (9) TMI 30 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] - We confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the ground of the Revenue. Interest on delay payment of excise duty and payment of service tax - HELD THAT:- We note that he Ld. CIT(A) has given relief to the assessee by relying on the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Narayani Ispat Pvt. Ltd. [2017 (10) TMI 67 - ITAT KOLKATA] which he did so correctly. And since the relief has been given by relying on the ratio of decision of the Tribunal in the case of Narayani Ispat Pvt. Ltd. (supra), we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A), therefore, we confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the grounds of Revenue. Delay payment of lease rent - HELD THAT:- Since Revenue could not demonstrate that the interest on delay payment of lease rent of Haldia plant was in the nature of penalty or an infraction of law, the Ld. CIT(A)’s view was plausible view and we find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and so we confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed. Prior period expenses disallowance - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT:- According to the assessee, all these expenses are genuine expenditure otherwise deductible from the income of the assessee. It is also noted that for the AY 2013-14 & AY 2014-15 the assessee has paid tax under MAT and the tax rate under MAT is same for both the year, hence it is noted that the assessee will not gain any benefit by deferring the tax liability. The assessee had relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Vishnu Industrial Gases (P) Ltd. [2008 (5) TMI 636 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and CIT vs. Shri Ram Pistons & Rings Ltd. [2008 (5) TMI 631 - DELHI HIGH COURT] It was held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court that unless it is noticed that the assessee has deliberately claimed prior period expenses by deliberate deferment to reduce tax liability in the subsequent years, there is no reason to disallow the prior period expenses in a summary manner. In the light of the aforesaid discussion, we find no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and we confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A), therefore, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed.
|