Subscription   Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Articles Highlights TMI Notes SMS News Newsletters Calendar Imp. Links Database Experts Contact us More....
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

ACIT Circle-16 (1) New Delhi Versus Tulip Star Hotels Ltd.

Disallowance u/s 14A - CIT(A) deleted the addition accepting additional evidence - Held that:- the instant case, the assessment year involved is prior to AY 2008-09, and the ld. AO has expressed his dissatisfaction with the correctness of the claim of the assessee with regards to the expenditure incurred against exempted income, we are of the opinion that the findings in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2011 (11) TMI 267 - Delhi High Court) are squarely applicable. Respectfully, follo .....

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 the AO should be given opportunity to verify the additional evidence furnished by the assessee before the ld CIT(A). Accordingly, we direct the ld CIT(A) to forward all the additional evidence to the ld. AO. Decided in favour of revenue for statistical purposes. - ITA No. 4908/Del./2011 - Dated:- 14-10-2015 - Smt. Diva Singh, JM And Sh. O. P. Kant, AM For the Appellant : Sh. J. P. Chandrekar, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Sh. Shashwat Bajpai, Adv. ORDER Per O. P. Kant, A. M. This appeal of 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

nder the IT Act. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT (A) has erred in admitting fresh evidence under Rule 46A even though it was objected by the AO in his remand report. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld: CIT (A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of professional fee expense of ₹ 1,96,85,000/-." 2. Facts in brief as culled out from the orders of the lower authorities are that the assessee is a domestic company which was incorpo .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

loss account, therefore, the ld AO in assessment order, invoking rule 8D of the IT Rules, disallowed interest expenses of ₹ 11,79,500/- out of the interest expenses of ₹ 16,52,364/- claimed in profit and loss account. The ld. AO also observed that the assessee claimed professional fee expenses of ₹ 1,96,85,000/- to three parties namely Jagmandi Finevest Pvt Ltd (Rs.44,91,000/-), Glider Holding Ltd. (Rs.45,09,000/-) and Agrawal Law Associates (Rs.1,06,85,000/) against sale of sh .....

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 year. In view of these finding, the ld. AO held that expenses of ₹ 1,96,85,000/- claimed against capital gain were not genuine, and therefore, he disallowed the same. The assessment was completed on 23.12.2009 u/s 143(3) of the Act at total income of ₹ 39,45,03,740/-. 3. Aggrieved, the assessee filed appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short CIT(A) ]. As regards to the addition of disallowance of expenses against the dividend income, the ld. CIT(A) i .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ails. For this limited direction, it is relied on the decision of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Kodak India Ltd vs. ACIT (supra). 4. As regards to the disallowance of professional fees expenses of ₹ 1,96,85,000/-, the assessee submitted additional evidences before the ld. CIT(A), wherein, he claimed that instead of Jagmandti Finevest Pvt. Ltd and Glider Holdings Ltd. services were taken from M/s. Market Share Securities Ltd. and M/s. Gejendra Marketing Services respectively. The assessee .....

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 has filed the appeal before us. 5. At the time of hearing, in respect of ground No.1, the learned Senior Departmental Representative (in short Sr. DR ) submitted that in view of the amended provisions of the section 251 of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) was not having authority in law to set aside the matter to the ld. AO for adjudication and argued that the disallowance made by the ld. AO may be confirmed. Whereas, the learned Authorised Representative (in short AR ) submitted that the ld. CIT(A) 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

wever, both the parties were ultimately concurred that issue involved in ground No.1 is covered by the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT 347 ITR 272 (Delhi), wherein it is held that Rule 8D was inapplicable to the assessment year prior to 2008-09 and the AO shall determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to exempted income on the basis of any reasoned and acceptable method. The relevant part of the judgement is reproduced as under .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

nt reasons that the amount of such expenditure as claimed by the assessee is not correct, he is required to determine the amount of such expenditure on the basis of a reasonable and acceptable method of apportionment………………………… 6. In the instant case, the assessment year involved is prior to AY 2008-09, and the ld. AO has expressed his dissatisfaction with the correctness of the claim of the assessee with regards to the expendi .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

iew of the above directions to the ld. AO, the issue whether the ld. CIT(A) has exceeded his authority in directing the ld. AO to compute disallowance following the decision in the case of Kodak India Ltd vs. ACIT (supra), is in our opinion, rendered merely academic. Accordingly, the ground No.1 of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purpose. 7. In ground No.2, the Revenue has challenged the admitting of additional evidences in respect of professional fee expenses, by the ld CIT(A) without pr .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

AO and therefore compliance of Rule 46A(3) has been made. In support of his claim, the ld AR placed reliance on the judicial pronouncements in the cases of Prabhavati Shah Vs. CIT (1998) 231 ITR 1 (Bom), CIT Vs. Kamlaben Sureshchandra Bhatti (2014) 367 ITR 692(Guj), Electra Jaipur P Ltd Vs. Inspecting ACIT (1988) 26 ITD 236(Del), CIT Vs. Jagjot Singh(2014)41taxman.com423(All), CIT Vs Unique Plastics P Ltd (2015) 60 Taxman.com ( AP& T), Jer Kersi Contractor V ITO Mum Trib ITA No. 1892/Mum/200 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

or, as the case may be, the Commissioner (Appeals) shall not take into account any evidence produced under sub-rule (1) unless the Assessing Officer has been allowed a reasonable opportunity- (a) to examine the evidence or document or to cross-examine the witness produced by the appellant, or (b) to produce any evidence or document or any witness in rebuttal of the additional evidence produced by the appellant. 10. A plain reading of the rule 46A(3), makes it clear that the ld CIT(A), before adm .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0-09-2010, addressed to your good self, the assessee has contended that the proforma bills/debit notes of M/s Jagmandri Finvest Pvt. Ltd. and M/s Glider Holdings Ltd. were booked inadvertently instead of booking the expenses in name of M/s Market Shares-Securities Ltd. and M/s Gajendra Marketing Services Ltd. The persons who were handling the affairs committed these errors. Before passing the order u/s 143(3) of the I.T. Act, the then AO provided sufficient opportunities on 19/10/2009 , 11/12/20 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ts have been submitted before your goodself appear to a result of manipulation of documents by the assessee company. 3. As far as the assessee's contention of non asking of documentary regarding payment to M/s Agarwal Law associates Ltd is concerned, it is to inform you that the then A.O had specifically asked the assessee to file documentary proof regarding payment made to M/s Agarwal Law Associates filed any proof in this regard also. Now, the assessee company has filed a confirmation by 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

filed by the assessee company at the time of assessment (copy enclosed) no amount was due for payment to the company/ firm M/s. Agarwal Law Associates. Therefore, the submission of the assessee company is self contradictory as per the finding given above. 4. In view of the above, the submission filed by the assessee company deserves to be rejected. Additional evidence now produced by the assessee should not be entertained by your good self because the assessee has willingly ignored to submit an .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssessing Officer, except in the following circumstances, namely:- (a) where the Assessing Officer has refused to admit evidence which ought to have been admitted; or (b) where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence which he was called to produce by the Assessing Officer; or (c) where the appellant was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the before the Assessing Officer any evidence which is relevant to any ground of appeal; or (d) Where 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

le opportunity- (a) To examine the evidence or documents or to cross-examine the witness produced by the assessee, or (b) To produce any evidence or documents or any witness in rebuttal of the additional evidence produced by the assessee. (4) nothing contained in this rule shall affect the power of the Commissioner (Appeals) to direct the production of any document, or the examination of any witness, to enable him to dispose of the appeal, or for any other substantial cause including the enhance .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

justification or reasons that he was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence which he was called to produce by the Assessing Officer; and (c) The appellant has not given any justification or reasons that he was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the before the Assessing Officer any evidence which is relevant to any ground of appeal; and (d) The Assessing Officer has made the order appealed against after giving sufficient opportunity to the appellant to adduce evidenc .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

] 68 ITR 708 (BOM.) The High Court of Bombay held that mere fact that the evidence sought to be produced is vital and important does not provide a substantial cause to allow its admission at appellate stage especially when evidence was available to party at initial stage and had not been produced by him. 7.2 In the case of C. Unnikrishnan v. Commissioner of Income-tax [1998] 233 ITR 485 (KER.) the High Court of Kerala observed that there was no evidence that any attempt was made by assessee to p .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

t of Gauhati held that the appellant is not entitled to produce oral or documentary evidence afresh before appellate authority, as a matter of right. As per sub-rules (1), (2) and (3) of rule 46A, if additional evidence is permitted to be produced, then firstly there must be reasons to be recorded in writing and secondly, reasonable opportunity has to be given to assessing authority-to refute and reject such production and that Rule 46A(4) does net permit to do away with procedural law prescribe .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

assessee also has to show alternatively that he was prevented by sufficient cause from producing the evidence before the Assessing Officer. Alternatively further the assessee also has to show its relevance to the grounds of appeal sought to be urged. Lastly, the assessee also has -to establish that the Assessing Officer did not afford him sufficient opportunity in regard thereto. The material on record is abundantly clear that no attempt was made by the assessee to produce the evidence before 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

ee for production of any additional evidence. 12. On perusal of the above, it is clear that the ld. AO has not been allowed reasonable opportunity to examine the documents submitted by the assessee. The case laws relied upon by the ld. AR are not relevant in facts of the assessee, whereas the in the facts of the instant case the judgement of jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Manish Builwell Pvt. Ltd. 245 CTR 397 (Del) is squarely applicable , where in it is held as under:- 24. 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

which interdicts the CIT (A) from taking into account any evidence produced for the first time before him unless the Assessing Officer has had a reasonable opportunity of examining the evidence and rebut the same, has not been complied with. There is nothing in the order of the CIT (A) to show that the Assessing Officer was confronted with the confirmation letters received by the assessee from the customers who paid the amounts by cheques and asked for comments. Thus, the end result has been 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

with the powers vested in him under Rule 46A. The Tribunal seems to have overlooked sub-rule (4) of Rule 46A which itself takes note of the distinction between the powers conferred by the CIT (A) under the statute while disposing of the assessee's appeal and the powers conferred upon him under Rule 46A. The Tribunal erred in its interpretation of the provisions of Rule 46A vis-A-vis Section 250(4). Its view that since in any case the CIT (A), by virtue of his conterminous powers over the ass .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

what is new what is new
  ↓     Latest Happenings     ↓  

Forum: GST Invoice

Forum: GST on RCM on rent in a unregistered state

Forum: COMPOSITION SCHEME

Article: Websites of Government Departments need lot of improvement. We are noticing detoriations in them for example, case of website of ITAT.

Highlight: Levy of additions tax u/s 115O on distribution of dividend - shares of its profits declared as distributable among the shareholders is not impressed with the character of the profit from which it reaches the hands of the shareholder - not to be bifurcated as agriculture and non-agriculture dividend - SC

Highlight: Rate of GST on old and scrap buses - 28% or 18% - at such initial tender process initiated by the Respondents-KSRTC, the present petitions filed by the petitioners are premature and misconceived and do not require any interference by this Court at this stage. - HC

Forum: Rent a cab operator

Highlight: In view of amendment made u/s 132A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by Finance Act of 2017, the 'reason to believe' or 'reason to suspect', as the case may be, shall not be disclosed to any person or any authority or the Appellate Tribunal, SC dismissed the appeal of the assessee

Highlight: Validity of Assessment Order - period of limitation u/s 153 (2A) is applicable even if the entire order was not set aside but matter was remanded back for for limited aspects with directions - HC

News: Note ban was a shake-up, achieved its main objectives

Notification: Amendments in the notification No.5/2017- Integrated Tax (Rate) dated the 28th June, 2017.

Highlight: Levying interest u/s 234C - interest is to be charged on the returned income and not on assessed income.

Highlight: Accrual of income - sale of right to develop and sell incentive FSI under LOI - till the conditions of LOI are fulfilled transfer is not complete and income does not accrue to the assessee

Highlight: TPA - determination of ALP - TP adjustment by applying Bright Line Test (BLT) is not sustainable on protective basis having no statutory mandate.

Highlight: Safeguard Duty - Advance License Scheme - as there is no exemption from safeguard duty leviable under Section 8C, which is imposed on the goods imported from China, the importer has to pay safeguard duty

Highlight: Manufacture - process of cutting of waste plastic container - Such plastic containers before and after cutting are nothing but waste / scrap - Not a manufacturing activity as no new product emerges.

News: NITI Aayog and Govt. of Assam organizes workshop on health sector reforms in Guwahati; launches SATH- Sustainable Action for Transforming Human Capital

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 5/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding restriction of refund on corduroy fabrics

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 2/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst exemptions

Forum: GSTR 3B Rectification

Notification: seeks to exempt Skimmed milk powder, or concentrated milk

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 2/2017- integrated tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to GST council decisions regarding GST exemptions.

Forum: 3B mistake

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 1/2017- central tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst rates

Notification: Seeks to amend notification no. 1/2017- integrated tax(rate) dated 28.06.2017 to give effect to gst council decisions regarding gst rates.

Forum: GST - TRAN1 - filed - Data uploaded with Remarks Processed with Error - Not coming in Electronic credit ledger - need suggession guidance

News: Notification Issued For GST Actionable Claim On Branded Food Products

Highlight: Classification printed computer stationary/manifold Business Forms - to be classified under Chapter Heading 4820.00 or under Chapter Heading 4901.90 - items like A4 sheets, advertisement and job card to be classified under Chapter 49

Article: RCM Applicability to persons not liable to get registered us 23(1)

Article: Credit of unsold stock [Section 140(3)] - Actual Credit as well as Notional Credit - Part-I - GST Transitional provisions

News: GST Refund - Blockage of Working Capital of Exporters - earlier also there was a normal blockage of funds for a period of 5-6 months at least

News: Clarification about Transition Credit - ₹ 1.27 lakh crore of credit of Central Excise and Service Tax was lying as closing balance as on 30th June, 2017 - claim of credit of ₹ 65,000 crore is not unexpected

Article: 20 Things You must know about E Way Bills in GST Law

Article: MISTAKES IN DRAFTING

Forum: Duty Drawback- Urgent

Highlight: The Customs and Central Excise Duties Drawback Rules, 2017 and All Industry Rates (AIRs) of Drawback related changes -reg. - Circular

Highlight: The definition of "subsidiary company" or "subsidiary" u/s 2(87) of the Companies Act, 2013 shall come into force w.e.f. 20-9-2017

Highlight: Central Government notified the All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017 - Notification

Notification: All Industry Rates of Duty Drawback Schedule w.e.f. 1.10.2017

Circular: Investment by Foreign Portfolio Investors in Corporate Debt Securities Review

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under UTGST Act

Notification: Exemptions on supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under IGST Act

Notification: List of Exempted supply of services under the CGST Act

Notification: Rates for supply of services under CGST Act

Highlight: Acceptance of deposits by companies from its members - conditions relaxed in case of Specified IFSC Public company and a private company - Rule 3 amended

Notification: Rate of exchange of conversion of the foreign currency with effect from 8th September, 2017

News: Tax Payers Advised To Confirm Identities Of Income Tax Search Authorities

Notification: Amendment in Appendix 3 (SCOMET items) to Schedule- 2 of ITC (HS) Classification of Export and Import Items 2012



|| 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