GST Helpdesk   Subscription   Demo   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2015 (5) TMI 150 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (5) TMI 150 - ITAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Disallowance of administrative expenses u/s.14A - Held that:- Since the assessee had sufficient profits generated this year and it had mixed funds and no nexus is established by the AO as to whether investment was made out of interest bearing funds, disallowance of interest cannot be made. Similarly no disallowance out of administrative expenditure can be made as there is no direct nexus. As a result, this grounds is allowed. See 2011 (2) TMI 1351 - ITAT .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

TMI 1351 - ITAT AHMEDABAD. This ground is allowed but for statistical purposes.

Disallowance of bad-debts - CIT(A) deleted addition - Held that:- There is no case for interference in the order of ld.CIT(A). It is admitted position that assessee has actually written off the amounts. Once it is so then matter is squarely covered by the decision of Hon.Supreme Court in the case of TRF Ltd. vs. CIT (2010 (2) TMI 211 - SUPREME COURT) wherein it is held that w.e.f. 1.4.1989 in order to obt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. It has to be properly ascertained and discounted on accrual basis. A proper calculation on this issue will be submitted to the AO who will examine the same and allow the claim as per decision of Hon.Supreme Court in Rotork Controls India (P) ltd. (2009 (5) TMI 16 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA) as above. This ground of Revenue is allowed but for statistical purposes.

Disallowance of proportionate interest expenses made by the AO u/s.36(1)(iii) - CIT(A) allowed claim - Held that:- .CIT(A) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

89- 90, the user charges claimed as royalty have been allowed in the assessments, the rate of user charges is 1% of the sales during the year under consideration. TDS has been made in respect of royalty payments. As it is a recurring expenditure payable on the basis of sales and the appellant has not acquired any capital asset or permanent right, the payment of royalty is allowable as business expenditure. The Revenue has not controverted this fact by placing any material on record, therefore, w .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the separate orders of the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-VIII, Ahmedabad ( CIT(A) in short) pertaining to Assessment Years (AYs) 2006-07, 2007-08 & 2008-09 dated 06/12/2010, 06/12/2010, & 07/07/2010 respectively. Since common issues and facts are involved in these appeals, these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by way of this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. 2. First, we take up the cross-appeals of Assessee and Revenue, i.e. ITA No.318/Ahd/20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

income. 3. The appellant prays for appropriate relief on the above grounds of appeals. 4. The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend, substitute, or withdraw any of the above grounds of appeal as circumstances may justify. (b) Revenue s appeal in ITA No.613/Ahd/2011- for AY 2006-07. 1. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 4,09,899/- being liquidated damages made by the A.O., without appreciating the facts and materials brought on record by the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 23,43,716/- being interest expenses, made by the A.O. U/s.14A of the Act, without appreciating the facts and materials brought on record by the Assessing Officer. 5. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 1,86,650/- being proportionate interest expenses made by the A.O. u/s.36(i)(iii) of the Act, without appreciating the facts and materials brought on record by the Assessing .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

o the above extent. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act ) was framed vide order dated 30/12/2008. The AO while framing the assessment, made various disallowances/additions on account of accrued interest to APSEB of ₹ 8,33,185/-, provisions for liquidated damages of ₹ 4,09,899/-, Bad debts written off of ₹ 34,39,000/- provisions .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ance of provisions for warranty expenses amounting to ₹ 1,12,14,000/-, disallowance made by invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Act amounting to ₹ 26,13,682/-, disallowance of proportionate interest u/s.36(1)(iii) amounting to ₹ 1,86,650/-, disallowance of claim of royalty amounting to ₹ 49,60,500/- and addition of Arms Length Price in respect of sale material to associated-concern amounting to ₹ 2,28,082/-. The ld.CIT(A) deleted the disallowance of ₹ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

owed the appeal, whereby the ld.CIT(A) deleted the addition made on account of the interest expenses and sustained the addition made on account of administrative expenses of ₹ 2,69,966/-. In respect of disallowance made u/s.36(1)(iii) of ₹ 1,86,650/-, the ld.CIT(A) following his predecessor s order passed in AY 2005-06 deleted the addition. In respect of the addition made on account of royalty of ₹ 49,60,500/-, the ld.CIT(A) following his predecessor s order passed in AY 2005-0 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

trative expenses u/s.14A of the Act. The ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee Shri S.N.Soparkar submitted that the identical issue was before the ITAT for AY 2005-06. He submitted that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the decision of his predecessor passed in AY 2005-06. He submitted that the issue travelled upto the Tribunal (ITAT A Bench) by way of ITA No.2627/Ahd/2008-Assessee s cross-appeal and ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008-Revenue s appeal and the Hon ble Tribunal vide order dated 28/01/2014 was pleased to deci .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

₹ 3,62,160/- being administrative expenses u/s.14A of the Act. 6.1. The ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that this issue is decided in favour of assessee by the Hon ble Coordinate Bench in ITA No.1476/Ahd/2006 pertaining to AY 2002-03. 6.2. On the contrary, ld.Sr.DR supported the order of the ld.CIT(A). The ld.Sr.DR has relied on the decision of Hon ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Dhanuka & Sons vs. CIT reported at (2011) 12 taxmann.com 227 (Cal.). 7. We have heard the riv .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

enditure can be made as there is no direct nexus. As a result, this grounds is allowed. In this year also, the AO has not established the nexus. Moreover, the ld.counsel for the assessee has relied on the decision of the Hon ble Kerala High Court in the case of CIT vs. Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd. reported at (2012) 207 Taxman 2 :: (2011) 9 taxmann.com 148 (Ker.)(Mag), wherein the Hon ble High Court has held that so far as disallowance of administrative expense is concerned, there is no precious fo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(SC). Therefore, respectfully following the decision of Hon ble Kerala High Court in the case of Catholic Syrian Bank Ltd.(supra), this ground of assessee s appeal is allowed. 3.1. The ld.Sr.DR Shri Dinesh Singh supported the orders of the authorities below. He submitted that some amount of the administrative expenses can be attributed to the earning of the exempt income. 4. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorit .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rounds raised in this appeal are general in nature need no separate adjudication. 5. In the result, the appeal of the Assessee for AY 2006-07 is allowed. 6. Now, we take up the Revenue s appeal (ITA No.613/Ahd/2011 - for AY 2006-07). 6.1. First ground of Revenue s appeal is against deletion of disallowance of ₹ 4,09,899/- in respect of liquidated damages made by the AO. 6.2. At the outset, ld.Sr.DR submitted that the identical issue was raised in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 for AY 2005-06(supra) .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f AO for decision afresh. The relevant findings of the Tribunal are reproduced hereunder:- 11.1. The first ground is against deletion of disallowance of provision for liquidated damages of ₹ 8,67,740/-. The ld.Sr.DR submitted that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in deleting the disallowance of provision for liquidated damages. On the contrary, ld.counsel for the assessee fairly submitted that under the identical facts, the Hon ble Coordinate Bench in ITA No.2002/Ahd/2007 for AY 2003-04 (as .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rial on record. In our considered view the issue regarding liquidated damages requires a fresh look by the AO. He would allow the claim on actual basis. Wherever the other party has claimed liquidated damages against the assessee in the current year Asst.Year it should be allowed. The assessee would submit individual account and the AO will examine such accounts and take a decision as per law. This ground is allowed but for statistical purposes. 12.1. After considering the totality of the facts, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008(supra). Thus, this ground of Revenue s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 8. Ground No.2 is against the deletion of disallowance of ₹ 34,39,000/- being bad-debts made by the AO. 8.1. The ld.Sr.DR supported the order of the AO. On the contrary, ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee Shri S.N.Soparkar submitted that in AY 2005-06, the Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008/Ahd/2008 had decided the issue in favour of assessee. He drew our attention towards paras-13 and 14 of .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

upported the order of the ld.CIT(A) and submitted that an identical issue has been decided by the Tribunal in ITA No.1241/Ahd/06 for AY 2002-03 (Revenue s cross-appeal), order dated 11/02/2011. 14. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the Hon ble Coordinate Bench vide para-43 of its order has decided this issue in favour of assessee by observing as under:- 43. We have heard the parties and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

bt in fact has become irrecoverable. It is enough if the bad debt is written off and the bad debt is irrecoverable in the account of assessee. Following the above decision of Hon.Supreme Court, we confirm the order of ld.CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of Revenue. 14.1. Since the facts are identical in this case also and the Revenue has not pointed out any change in the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore we uphold the order of the ld.CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of the Revenue s app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nce of ₹ 1,12,14,000/- being provision for warranty expenses made by the AO. 10.1. The ld.Sr.DR submitted that the Tribunal in earlier assessment year, i.e. AY 2005-06 was pleased to restore this issue to the file of AO. He drew our attention towards para-15 of the Tribunal s order passed in ITA Noa.2923/Ahd/2008(supra). 10.2. The ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee fairly conceded the fact that this issue has been restored to the file of the AO. 11. After hearing both the parties, we find that .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

n set aside to the file of AO by the Hon ble Coordinate Bench in ITA No.12/Ahd/2008 for AY 2004- 05. 15.1. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the Hon ble Tribunal in ITA No.12/Ahd/2008 for AY 2004-05 (Revenue s appeal in assessee s own case) vide order dated 11/12/2011 has restored the matter back to the file of AO by observing as under:- 76. Ground No.2 relates to deletion of a sum of & .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

properly ascertained and discounted on accrual basis. A proper calculation on this issue will be submitted to the AO who will examine the same and allow the claim as per decision of Hon.Supreme Court in Rotork Controls India (P) ltd. (supra) as above. This ground of Revenue is allowed but for statistical purposes. 15.2. Since the facts are identical in this case also and the Revenue has not pointed out any change in the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore taking a consistent view, we .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

tical purposes. 12. Ground No.4 is against the deletion of disallowance of interest expenses of ₹ 23,43,716/- being interest expenses made by the AO u/s.14A of the Act. 12.1. At the outset, ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee pointed out that the identical issue came before the Hon ble Tribunal by way of ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008-Revenue s appeal, wherein the Hon ble Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of assessee. 12.2. The ld.Sr.DR has fairly conceded the fact that the Tribunal has decided th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s.14A of the Act. The ld.Sr.DR supported the order of the AO and placed reliance on the decision of Hon ble Calcutta High Court rendered in the case of Dhanuka & Sons vs. CIT (supra) and decision of ITAT Mumbai Bench rendered in the case of Kalpataru Construction Overseas (P.) Ltd. vs. DCIT reported at (2007) 13 SOT 194 (Mum.). On the contrary, ld.counsel for the assessee supported the order of the ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the issue has been decided by the Hon ble Coordinate Bench in ITA .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

d. (supra) only when it is held that some amount is required to disallowed as there is a nexus between the exempted income and investment, i.e. if Revenue is able to show that interest bearing capital has been invested in shares but where no such nexus is established the question of determining any disallowance does not arise and, therefore, matter need not be sent to the file of AO as no determination of any disallowance would be necessary. In the present case we notice that loan funds have dec .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ent on which no income is earned. After S.A.Builders case (supra) onus is considered shifted to the Revenue and AO has to show that interest bearing capital alone were invested in investment on which no income was earned. Hon.Supreme Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT (2008) 298 ITR 298 (SC) held where assessee had sufficient profits in the current year then interest free advances can be considered to be flowing from such profits. Hon ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Reliance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he assessee has made investment in subsidiaries out of mixed funds and for commercial expediency then no interest out of payment made on borrowed funds can be disallowed as held in S.A.Builders Ltd. vs. CIT (2007) 288 ITR 1 (SC). Hon ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 518 (P& H) held that no disallowance out of interest payment is permissible if AO does not establish nexus between the expenditure incurred and income generated. 16. Since assessee ha .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ear and it had mixed funds and no nexus is established by the AO as to whether investment was made out of interest-bearing funds, disallowance of interest cannot be made. In the present case also, the facts are identical, therefore we do not find any reason to take a contrary view than taken by the Hon ble Coordinate Bench. Thus, this ground of the Revenue s appeal is rejected. 13.1. Since the facts are identical to the facts as were raised in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 for AY 2005-06 and the Revenue .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

et, the ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee pointed out that the identical issue came before the Hon ble Tribunal by way of ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008-Revenue s appeal, wherein the Hon ble Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of assessee. 14.2. The ld.Sr.DR has fairly conceded the fact that the Tribunal has decided this issue in favour of assessee for AY 2005-06. However, he supported the order of the AO. 15. We have heard the parties. We find that the issue travelled upto the stage of Tribunal by way .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 16 by observing as under:- 9. Ground No.4(a) relates to disallowance of proportionate interest of ₹ 10,70,7000/-. The AO disallowed proportionate interest out of interest paid on borrowed funds on the assumption that borrowed money has been used for acquisition of investment as on balance sheet date. As per AO the Company had made total investment to the extent of ₹ 1008.51 lacs in the equity shares and Mutual funds. During the year the investment in shares and Mutual funds were in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Invoking section 14A AO held that expenditure for earning exempted income cannot be allowed as deduction. Similarly, the AO identified that administrative expenditure which could have been incurred for handling the investment in shares and Mutual Fund. A part of such expenditure was considered attributable to investment made in sister concerns, the income therefrom was exempt under section 10(33). The assessee submitted that it has enough working capital and it has not increased its borrowings t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

that interest free funds were alone used for making such investment in sister concerns. The assessee has not maintained separate account for making investment are out of mixed funds. There is no nexus between the investment and interest free funds. Onus is on the assessee during the year and also in earlier years that investment for earning capital gains and dividend are made out of interest free capital. After long and detailed discussion the AO disallowed pro-rata interest worked out at ͅ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

present case also, the facts are identical as the ld.CIT(A) had given a finding on fact that there assessee had sufficient interest free fund and it had not diverted the interest bearing fund same remained unrebutted. Therefore, we do not find any reason to take a contrary view than taken by the Hon ble Coordinate Bench. Thus, this ground of the Revenue s appeal is rejected. 15.1. Since the facts are identical to the facts as were raised in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 for AY 2005-06 and the Revenue has .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

he assessee pointed out that the identical issue came before the Hon ble Tribunal by way of ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008-Revenue s appeal, wherein the Hon ble Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of assessee. 16.2. The ld.Sr.DR has fairly conceded the fact that the Tribunal has decided this issue in favour of assessee for AY 2005-06. However, he supported the order of the AO. 17. We have heard the parties. We find that the issue travelled upto the stage of Tribunal by way of ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 and .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

f ownership. The payment of Royalty is related to sales made by user of technology supplied by them. If the assessee does not use the technology then no royalty payment is required. User of the trademark did not create any asset or conferred any permanent right in favour of the assessee. The Agreement is only for 11 years and terminable by short notice. Royalty is paid in course of profit earning process. 20.1. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gon .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

able on the basis of sales and the appellant has not acquired any capital asset or permanent right, the payment of royalty is allowable as business expenditure. The Revenue has not controverted this fact by placing any material on record, therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld.CIT(A), the same is hereby upheld. Thus, this ground of Revenue s appeal is rejected. 17.1. Since there is no change into the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore taking a consistent view, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

been raised by the respective parties:- (c) Assessee s appeal for AY 2007-08 (ITA No.319/Ahd/2011) 1. The Learned Commissioner (Appeal) failed to understand the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. The Learned Commissioner (Appeal) erred in confirming the disallowance of ₹ 9,14,475/- being administrative expenses u/s.14A of the Act, considering them incurred in relation to exempted dividend income. 3. The appellant prays for appropriate relief on the above grounds of appeals. 4. The app .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

1,53,55,536/- being provision for warranty expenses, made by the A.O., without appreciating the facts and materials brought on record by the Assessing Officer. 3. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of interest expenses ₹ 25,28,987/- and Admn.Exoebses of ₹ 9,14,475/- made by the AO U/s.14A of the Act, without appreciating the facts and materials brought on record by the Assessing Officer. 4. The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e disallowance of ₹ 17,21,313/- being provision for bad advances written off, made by the A.O., without appreciating the facts and materials brought on record by the Assessing Officer. 7. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld.CIT(A) ought to have upheld the decision of the Assessing Officer. 8. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the learned CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored to the above extent. (e) Assessee s appeal for AY .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

udice to above ground of appeal, the Commissioner (Appeal) erred in including ₹ 5,22,75,000/- being investment in foreign subsidiary from which income not forming part of total income is earned, in the average value of investment for working out interest disallowable u/s.14A of the Act r.w.r.8D. 4. The Learned Commissioner(Appeal) erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 1,82,085/- on account of provision for advances with direction not to tax in assessment year 2011-12 being the year o .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

s in the nature of contingent, unascertained and non-crystallized liability. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 27,96,724/- made on account of interest expenses u/s.36(1)(iii) without appreciating the fact that once the funds are put into the business, they lose identity. 3. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 62,84,947/- made on account of royalty payment without appreciating the fact that the sa .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ntical as were in the year 2006-07. In this year also, the AO and the ld.CIT(A) followed their order passed in AY 2005-06. The matter travelled upto the stage of the Tribunal and the Tribunal was pleased to decide this issue in favour of assessee in ITA No.2627/Ahd/2008 for AY 2005-06. There is no change into the facts and circumstances in the present year. The Revenue has not pointed out any change into the facts and circumstances, therefore taking a consistent view. This ground of assessee s a .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e ld.CIT(A). It is contended by the ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee that the ld.CIT(A) followed its order passed in the AY 2005-06 and the issue travelled upto the stage of Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 and the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of assessee. The ld.Sr.DR has fairly conceded the facts. Therefore, taking a consistent view, this ground of Revenue s appeal is rejected. 23. Ground No.2 is against the deletion of disallowance of expenses made for the provision for warranty amo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the authorities below. We find that this Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 in paras-15, 15.1 & 15.2(reproduced at para-11 of this order) has restored this issue by following the order of the Coordinate Bench passed in ITA No.12/Ahd/2008 for AY 2004-05. Since there is no change into the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore taking a consistent view, the issue is restored to the file of AO for decision afresh in the light of the direction given by the Tribunal in ITA No.12/Ahd/2008 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 has decided the issue in favour of assessee, in paras- 16 & 17 of its order. The ld.Sr.DR has fairly conceded the fact that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06. 25. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The facts are identical as were in the AY 2005-06. This Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 for AY 2005-06, order dated 28/01/014, has decided the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

pointed out that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06 and the issue travelled upto the stage of the Tribunal and the Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 has decided the issue in favour of assessee, in para 18 of its order. The ld.Sr.DR has fairly conceded the fact that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06. 27. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The facts are ide .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ing royalty expense. The ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee has pointed out that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06 and the issue travelled upto the stage of the Tribunal and the Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 has decided the issue in favour of assessee, in para-20 of its order. The ld.Sr.DR has supported the order of the AO and fairly conceded the fact that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06. 29. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the materi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

is rejected. 30. Ground No.6 is against the deletion of disallowance of ₹ 17,21,313/- in respect of provision for bad advances written off. The ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee has pointed out that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06 and the issue under appeal travelled upto the stage of the Tribunal and the Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 was pleased to set aside the issue to the file of AO in para-11.1 & 12.1 of its order. The ld.Sr.DR supported the order of the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

amp; 7.1 of this order). Since there is no change into the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore taking a consistent view, the issue is restored to the file of AO to decide the same afresh in the light of the direction given in ITA No.2002/Ahd/2007 for AY 2003-04, dated 11/02/2011. Thus, this ground of Revenue s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 32. Ground Nos.7 & 8 are general in nature need no independent adjudication. 33. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue for AY .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

llowance of ₹ 14,25,893/- out of interest expenses u/s.14A r.w.Rule 8D of the Act and alternatively, erred in including ₹ 5,22,75,000/- being investment in foreign subsidiary which calculating average value of investment for working out interest disallowable. 34.4. The ld.Sr.counsel for the assessee has pointed out that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06 and the issue travelled upto the stage of the Tribunal and the Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 has decided .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

favour of assessee in paras-16 & 17 (reproduced in paras-13 & 13.1 of this order). Since there is no change into the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore taking a consistent view, the issue is decided in favour of assessee. Thus, these grounds of Assessee s appeal are allowed. 35. In the result, Assessee s appeal for AY 2008-09 is partly allowed. 36. Revenue s appeal (ITA No.2296/Ahd/2011):- Ground No.1 is against deletion of disallowance of ₹ 1,47,77,100/- made on accoun .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

erused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06. The facts are identical as were in the AY 2005-06. This Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 for AY 2005-06, order dated 28/01/014, has set aside the issue to the file of AO in para-15 (reproduced in paras-11 & 11.1 of this order). Since there is no change into the facts and circumstances of the case, therefore taking a consistent v .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

5-06 and the issue travelled upto the stage of the Tribunal and the Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/2008 has decided the issue in favour of assessee, in para- 18 of its order. The ld.Sr.DR has fairly conceded the fact that the ld.CIT(A) has followed the order passed in AY 2005-06. 37.1. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. The facts are identical as were in the AY 2005-06. This Tribunal in ITA No.2923/Ahd/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version