TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 175X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nting any deduction for certain expenses which were originally claimed by the assessee - there is no business income left with the assessee and consequently there are no expenses for which any deduction could be allowed under Chapter IV-D of the Act - once there is no expenditure claimed as deduction by the assessee, there can be no question of making any disallowance u/s 14A because the disallowance under the section pre-supposes the claim for deduction of expenses - unless there is a deduction for any expenditure incurred by the assessee, there cannot be any disallowance u/s 14A – Decided against Revenue. Levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the Act – Held that:- The assessee has accepted that the addition being the non-compete fees r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the impugned order on this issue. 4. The first issue raised by the Revenue in its appeal is against the deletion of addition made by the A.O u/s 14A of the Act. 5. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the assessee is a salaried employee of M/s Uzind Corporation, which is a partnership form comprising of his daughter and wife, as partners. The assessee showed income from salary, house property, capital gain, income form other sources and from business. A survey was carried out in the premises of M/s Uzind Corporation, which is a general sales agent of M/s Uzbekistan Airways. The assessee and the partnership firm consisting of his wife and daughter entered into an agreement dated 15.3.2002 (noncompetent agreement) as per which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cific query the ld. DR could not point out any claim of deduction by the assessee for expenses. We, therefore, uphold the impugned order on this issue. 7. The other issue in the Revenue s appeal is against the charging of interest u/s 234B and 234C. As noticed above the assessee offered a sum of Rs. 1.13 crore as business income. The Assessing Officer held that a sum of Rs. 56,97,192/-, being the non-compete fees declared by the partnership form was taxable as assessee s income from salary. He, therefore, made the addition for this sum of Rs. 56.97 lakh. When the matter came up before the ld. CIT(A), he noticed that the action of the A.O in making addition of Rs. 56.97 lakh as salary has resulted in double taxation because the assessee h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
