TMI Blog2010 (10) TMI 688X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... already decided by the Tribunal - This ground is allowed Bad debts - The AO called upon the assessee to produce the details of each and every TDS certificate, the amount involved and the year in which it was taxed - It is noted that the assessee claimed deduction for bad debts on the ground that the benefit of TDS certificates could not be availed by the assessee due to such certificates either being lost or not available - In the absence of any details of such TDS certificates claimed as bad debts in this year or earlier years, it is not possible to ascertain as to whether the deduction on account of bad debts towards the bill amounts, for which separate deduction has been claimed, contain the amount of TDS - Matter is remanded back to AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... et aside the impugned order on this issue and restore the matter to the file of AO for taking a fresh decision in accordance with the view taken by the Special Bench in the aforenoted case of Amway India Enterprises (supra). 4. Ground no. 2 is against the confirmation of disallowance of repairs and renovation expenses carried out at leased premises amounting to Rs.24,90,766/. The facts of this ground are that the AO made the said disallowance which came to be upheld by the CIT(A) on the basis of the reasoning given by him in the assessee s case for the asstt. year 2002-03. The case of the assessee for the asstt. year 2002-03 came up for adjudication before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 25-03-2009, a copy of which is available on record ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cord, it is noted that the assessee claimed deduction for bad debts on the ground that the benefit of TDS certificates could not be availed by the assessee due to such certificates either being lost or not available. At the same time, it is further seen that the assessee has been making claim for bad debts of the disputed bill amounts. The view of the AO that the disputed bill amount may contain the element of TDS certificate as well, has some substance. If the deduction is claimed for the full amount of bill value inclusive of TDS, and further allowance of deduction towards TDS certificate is allowed, that would amount to double deduction. On the contrary, the ld. A.R. contended that the disputed bill amounts did not contain the TDS elemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lief u/s.54EC. He, therefore, refused to allow the carry forward of the remaining amount of loss of Rs.1,24,058/-. No relief was allowed in the first appeal. 9. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material on record, it is noted that the assessee earned long-term capital gain of Rs.2.75 crores and relief was claimed u/s.54EC amounting to Rs.2.65 crores. The case of the authorities below is that the brought forward long-term capital loss should have been adjusted first against the long-term capital gain of Rs.2.75 crores and only thereafter the amount of relief u/s.54EC could be allowed. We are not convinced with the viewpoint of the authorities below. The reason is obvious that capital gain is computed u/s. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
