TMI Blog2015 (9) TMI 492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng to grant of interest under section 244A - whether is to be decided by jurisdictional Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner? - Held that:- In view of the decision of Tata Communications Ltd. Vs. ACIT [2014 (1) TMI 1277 - ITAT MUMBAI ] the grounds of appeal raised by the assessee is a valid one warranting adjudication by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Since the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not gone into merits and held that matter is not appealable, we restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer to decide the issue in accordance with law, after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. Disallowance of advertisement & publicity expenses and office expenses - Held that:- Expenses were disallowed by the Assessing Officer stating that assessee incurred these expenses as donation to church. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) however partly allowed such expenses holding that certain payments were made for publicity and such expenses are to the extent of ₹ 1,55,000/- and confirmed expenses of ₹ 55,000/-. We do not see any infirmity in the order of the Commissioner of Income Ta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) after considering the submissions of the assessee and the contentions of the Assessing Officer sustained the disallowance of agricultural expenses. 4. Counsel for the assessee submits that assessee has wrongly shown the income from farm tourism as income from agriculture in its profit and loss account. Therefore, he submits that it is not agricultural income and agricultural expenses so as to disallow the same under section 14A of the Act. He further submits that agricultural income was considered for tax purposes and therefore it cannot be held that such income is exempt so as to attract provisions of section 14A of the Act. 5. Departmental Representative vehemently submits that what was shown by the assessee is agricultural income only and therefore agricultural expenses debited to profit and loss account over and above the income cannot be allowed as deduction. 6. Heard both sides. Perused orders of lower authorities. This issue has been elaborately considered by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) with reference to the submissions of the assessee and contentions of the Assessing Officer and sustained the disallowance of agricultural expenses observing as under:- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sted by the auditor. On careful consideration I find that the appellant has not countered the points made by the AO in the assessment order for drawing adverse inference. It is a settled law that the onus is on the appellant to furnish verifiable evidence to prove that income earned is from agriculture [CIT vs R. Venkataswamy Naidu 29 ITR 529 (SC)]. On the same logic the onus is on the appellant to prove that the net result of agriculture activity is loss of ₹ 4,98,385/-. Therefore I confirm the disallowance of claim of RsA,98,385/- made by the AO for the fact that the appellant has not substantiated the claim with evidences. Similarly the appellant also has not proved that the income earned of ₹ 8,67,880/- is out of agriculture with evidence and hence I confirm the addition on this ground. However, the appellant has submitted that the addition of agricultural income of ₹ 8,67,880/- made by the AO amounted to duplication of income as the total income as per return ₹ 18,63,160/- includes ₹ 8,67,880/-. The Assessing Officer is directed to verify the contention of the appellant and if found to be true reduce the amount of ₹ 8,67,880/-while giving ef ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Tax (Appeals) dismissed the grounds of appeal of the assessee holding that dispute relating to grant of interest under section 244A is to be decided by jurisdictional Commissioner or the Chief Commissioner. 11. On hearing both the parties, we find that Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Tata Communications Ltd. Vs. ACIT in ITA No.8592/Mum/2010 dated 24.07.2013 considering a similar issue held that assessee had preferred a valid appeal warranting adjudication. While holding so, the Tribunal observed as under:- We have heard the parties, and perused the material on record. The issue arising for determination in the instant case is a pure legal issue, i.e., whether the assessee could, de horsits liability to tax, contest an order of assessment in appeal on the ground of non-grant of or otherwise the quantum of the interest granted u/s.244A of the Act. The decision by the hon ble jurisdictional high court in the case of Caltex Oil Refining (India) Ltd.(supra) relied upon by the assessee has been perused by us. In our view, the same squarely covers the issue at hand. The decision by the apex court in the case of Central ITA No.8592/Mum/2010 (A.Y. 2001-02) Tata Communi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessment disallowed ₹ 2,14,700/- under the head advertisement publicity and also office expenses of ₹ 55,000/- stating that some of these expenses are donation to church day function and not for advertisement in connection with the business. On appeal, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) restricted the disallowance in respect of advertisement publicity expenses to the extent of ₹ 59,000/- and gave relief of ₹ 1,55,000/- and in respect of office expenses, he confirmed the same in view of the observations made by the Assessing Officer. 14. Counsel for the assessee submits that Assessing Officer is not justified in disallowing the advertisement publicity expenses. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should have allowed entire expenses. 15. Departmental Representative places reliance on the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). 16. Heard both sides. On going through the orders of the lower authorities, we find that expenses were disallowed by the Assessing Officer stating that assessee incurred these expenses as donation to church. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) however partly allowed such expenses holding that cer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
