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

2015 (12) TMI 195 - ITAT AHMEDABAD

2015 (12) TMI 195 - ITAT AHMEDABAD - TMI - Disallowance of claim of expenditure of premium paid on SLR investments - Held that:- We are of the view that amortization of premium is allowable in accounting practice. As per RBIís guidelines, amortization of premium in case of assets treated as HTM (Held to Maturity) (Investments) is to be amortized divided equally over the period which is remaining for their maturity. Same has been done by assessee. Amortization of expenses has been recognized in s .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ri Jigar M. Patel, AR ORDER Per Shri Kul Bharat, Judicial Member This bunch of three appeals; one by the Revenue and the other two by the Assessee are directed against the separate orders of the ld.Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-Gandhinagar ( CIT(A) in short) pertaining to Assessment Years (AYs) 2009-10, 2010-11 and 2011-12 dated 11/05/2012, 01/11/2013 & 27/02/2015 respectively. Since common issues and facts are involved in these appeals, these were heard together and are being disposed .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ed that the order of the learned CIT(Appeals) may be set aside and that of the A.O. be restored to the above extent. 2.1. The only effective ground in this appeal is against deletion of disallowance of ₹ 1,47,87,955/-. 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 21/11/2011, thereby the Assessing Officer (AO in short) dis .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

09, deleted the disallowance. Aggrieved by the order of the ld.CIT(A), now the Revenue is appeal before us. 3. At the outset, ld.counsel for the assessee submitted that the issue is squarely covered in favour of assessee by the decision of the Coordinate Bench (ITT A Bench Ahmedabad) in assessee s own case in ITA No.2059/Ahd/2011 for AY 2008-09, dated 05/06/2015. 3.1. The ld.Sr.DR did not controvert the submission of the ld.counsel for the assessee, however he supported the assessment order 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

Similar issue was decided in favour of the assessee in earlier assessment years including 2008- 09; wherein it was held as under: I have carefully considered the reasoning of the AO justifying the disallowance made by him and the submissions made by the appellant in this regard. The same issue was decided in favour of assessee and I agree with the assessee that amortization of premium is allowable in accounting practice. As per the RBI s guidelines the amortization of premium in the case of 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

e case of the assessee is squarely covered and the amortization of the expenses over the years till maturity of the securities is allowable. The ground of appeal is allowed. The facts of the issue remaining the same, I do not find any reason to deviate from the decision taken by me in the earlier assessment year i.e. AY 2008-09 in the case of the assessee. Therefore, the ground of appeal is allowed. The AO is directed to verify the calculation of amortization over the years till maturity while g .....

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 assets treated as HTM (Held to Maturity) (Investments) is to be amortized divided equally over the period which is remaining for their maturity. Same has been done by assessee. Amortization of expenses has been recognized in similar circumstances in case of premium of debentures, which was also held as investments in different judgements including that of Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Madras Industrial Investment Corp.Ltd. Vs. CIT(A) 225 ITR 802 (SC) relied by assessee. In view of this, C .....

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 facts and circumstances of the case, therefore respectfully following the aforesaid judgement of the Hon ble Apex Court and decision of the Tribunal, we do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the ld.CIT(A), same is hereby upheld. Thus, the appeal of the Revenue is rejected. 5. Now we take up the assessee s appeals in ITA No.57/Ahd/2014 and 946/Ahd/2015 for AY 2010-11 & 2011-12 respectively. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeals:- For AY 2010-11 The appe .....

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 appellant by his learned predecessor, who had respectfully following the ratio as laid down in the judicial pronouncements of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corp. Ltd. v/s. CIT 225 ITR 802 and CIT v/s. Jagatjit Industries Ltd. 287 ITR 46 (Del) allowed the appeals on this point. The appellant requests that leave be granted to add, alter, amend or withdraw any ground of appeal on or before final hearing of the appeal. For AY 2011-12 The appellant respe .....

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