9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 895X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the various Government contractees out of the contract value till the establishment of specific performances as specified and issuance of taking over certi ficate. The Assessing Officer during the course of assessment noted that the assessee has c redited the retention money as part of the revenue receipt but while computing the taxable income excluded the same out of the income chargeable to tax. It was also noted that in the earlier year, the assessee was following the mercantile system of accounting of the retention money on due basis and the auditor has not given any note in this regard. The Assessing Officer, therefore, treated the same as income of the assessee and made the addition. When the matter went before the ld. CIT(Appeals), l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elhi)]; (iii) CIT -vs.- Ignified Boilers India Limited [283 ITR 295 (Madras)]; (iv) CIT -vs.- East Coast Construction & Industries [283 ITR 297 (Madras)]; (v) CIT -vs.- Associated Cables Pvt. Limited [286 ITR 596 (Mumbai)]; (vi) CIT -vs.- P&C Construction Pvt. Ltd. [318 ITR 113] (Madras); (vii) CIT -vs.- Krishna Gopal Kapoor & Sons [325 ITR 214 (Allahabad)]; (viii) DIT -vs.- Ballast Nedam International (2013) 355 ITR 300 (Gujrat); (ix) Amarshiv Construction (Pvt.) Limited [102 DTR (Guj.) 33]. 5. Ld. D.R. even though before us vehemently relied on the order of the Assessing Officer but could not adduce any decision contrary to the one as has been taken by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court. In view of the aforesaid decision, we co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ,234/- from the interest warrants produced before me. Interest is credited from record date to record date and on the record date TDS has also been deducted on the whole of the interest between two record dates. This fact further supports the claim of the assessee that interest income on Bond accrues only on the record date. Further, the accrued interest has been offered for taxation in the next year and same accounting system is followed by the assesese in next year as evident from the copy of Income tax return for the assessment year 2008-09 along with details of interest income and short-term capital gain. So, there is no loss of rev enue. It is only deferment of income from one year to next year. Respectfully following the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10. 13. We have heard the rival submissions and carefully considered the same. We noted that the Assessing Officer had disallowed the expenditure by invoking Rule 8D read with section 14A of the Income Tax Act. We noted that Rule 8D has been inserted by the Income Tax (5t h Amendment ) Rules, 2008 w.e.f. 24th March, 2008. Hon'ble Mumbai High Court in the caes of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. -vs.- DCIT reported in 328 ITR 81 (Mum.) has clearly held that Rule 8D is not ret rospective but prospective. The impugned assessment is the assessment year 2007-08 while Rule 8D has been inserted w.e. f. 24t h March, 2008. Therefore, the Assessing Officer, in our opinion, is not correct in law in allowing the disallowance by applying Rule 8D. We ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed, Rukmani Elect ricals, and Unique St ructure amounting to Rs. 43,202/-, Rs. 21/-, Rs. 54,771/- respectively, documents are unreconciled. He, therefore, sustained the addition to that extent. 16. Ld. D.R. before us even though vehemently relied on the order of the Assessing officer but could not brought to our knowledge how there is a mistake in the reconciliation as has been examined by the ld. CIT(Appeals) and has been produced in para 11.2 of his order. In view of this fac t, in our opinion, ld. CIT(Appeals) was justified in sustaining the addition as made by the Assessing Officer. We accordingly dismiss the ground taken by the Revenue. 17. ITA No. 287/Kol/2011 (Assessee's appeal) The fi rst ground of assessee's appeal relates to t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter went before the ld. CIT(Appeal s), ld. CIT(Appeals) al so noted that the payment by account payee cheque or deduction of the TDS are not sufficient to prove the recipient of the commission has procured sale orders, developed the business of assessee or widened the services. He also noted that the principal business of the assessee is undertaking cont ract work for the Government or semi- Government agencies. No canvassing is requi red to obtain such contract s. For allowability of commission payment one of the most important ingredient is the services rendered is missing in this case in absence of the supporting evidences. 21. Ld. A.R. even though vehemently contended that the commission paid by the assessee in the subsequent ye ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
