Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (7) TMI 1119 - ITAT MUMBAIAddition of increase in Modvat credit u/s 145A - Assessee argued assessee has been consistently and regularly following the same valuation method for the last 15 years and there is no deviation in valuation formula - HELD THAT:- Appellant was correct to argue that this modvat has never been debited to Prof it and loss account. It is only reflected in the balance sheet in the assets side. Therefore, cannot be treated as income at all. Further, also relying on the Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Indo Nippon Chemicals [2003 (1) TMI 8 - SUPREME COURT] wherein it is held as under Modvat credit available to manufacturers upon purchase of duty paid raw material though irreversible does not amount o chargeable income. We Considering the decision of the CIT(A) for the A.Y 2011-12, direct the Assessing officer to delete the addition. Addition u/s 50C - contention of the AR that the assessee company has become a sick industrial company and the assets were being sold to cut down the costing and repayment of the loans - HELD THAT:- We find that in the assessment proceedings the assessee has filed the explanations on sale of depreciable Assets units is Chennai, which was unused for years and was in an unusable condition Further on verification of agreements filed in the course of hearing,we find that the assessee has sold depreciable assets being building and the same was mentioned before the lower authorities. Whereas the Ld.AR has relied on the BIFR order and the assessee company financials with negative net worth. We find that there is no bifurcation of value of building which is depreciated over the period of time. A.O. has pointed out only difference aspect but the fact remains the assessee company has become sick company and burdened with financial difficulties and the net worth has become negative. The assessee company has made a distress sale at realizable price, which is justified considering the financial constrains and the circumstances of selling the depreciable asset and was in an unusable condition. Accordingly, we set-aside the order of the CIT(A) on this ground of appeal and direct assessing officer to delete the addition. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Set off and carry forward of unabsorbed deprecation pertaining to A.Y1996-97 to 2001-02 beyond the stipulated period - HELD THAT:- We found that the Ld.CIT(A) has relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of General Motors Ind Pvt Ltd., Vs. DCIT [2012 (8) TMI 714 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. We find on the similar disputed issue the Hon’ble Supreme court of India in CIT VS Associated Cables (P) Ltd [2019 (5) TMI 1083 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA]has dismissed the SLP filed by the Revenue against the Jurisdictional Bombay High Court order. DR could not controvert the observations of the CIT(A) with any new cogent evidence or information. Whereas, the Ld.CIT(A) relied on the Hon’ble High Court and Hon’ble Tribunal decisions and passed a reasoned order. Accordingly, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and uphold the same and dismiss the grounds of appeal of the revenue.
|