Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2015 (5) TMI 1044

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... stances in the case of cvs. DCIT (2013 (11) TMI 115 - ITAT CHANDIGARH ) by following the decision of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT Vs. B.N. Exports [2010 (3) TMI 186 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] has held that premium paid on insurance of Keyman is allowable expenditure. - Decided in favour of assessee Interest income treated as income from other sources - Held that:- In one of the group cases in case of CIT-I, Ludhiana vs. M/s. Eastman Industries, Ludhiana (2010 (2) TMI 408 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT ) such income was accepted as income from business.- Decided in favour of assessee - ITA No. 757/Chd/2014 - - - Dated:- 26-5-2015 - SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER For the Appe .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... reciation @80% whereas the AO has brought on record sufficient material to prove that the transmission and distribution net work was actually plant and machinery which is eligible only for normal rates of depreciation @ 15% u/s 32 of the Income Tax Act. 1961. iv) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of ₹ 1,27,49,983/- paid on life of partners debited to profit and loss account as Keyman Insurance Premium disallowed by the Assessing Officer as non-business expenditure, by not deciding the issue on merits. v) That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in considering the interest income earned from Money Lending business under the head business Income which was held to be inc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Ground No. iv 7. During the assessment proceedings it was noticed by AO that Assessee has paid a sum of ₹ 1,27,49,983/- on account of Insurance premium paid for life of the partners as Keyman in the firm. This expenditure was held to be not allowable. 8. On appeal the Ld. CIT allowed this claim in view of the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in case of CIT Vs. B.N. Exports 323 ITR 178. 9. Before us Ld. DR strongly supported the order of AO. 10. On the other hand Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that this issue is also covered by the decision of Chandigarh bench of Tribunal in case of Laj Exports Vs. DCIT 20 ITR(Trib)111 and ACIT vs. Paramount Impex in ITA No. 762/CHD/2011. 11. After con .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ses in case of CIT-I, Ludhiana vs. M/s. Eastman Industries, Ludhiana (Hon'ble High Court of Punjab Haryana ) in ITA No. 2 of 2010 such income was accepted as income from business. 16. After considering the rival submissions we find that Hon ble Punjab Haryana High Court in similar circumstances in case of CIT-I, Ludhiana vs. M/s. Eastman Industries (supra) considered the following question: (i) Whether on the facts and in law, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 56,66,950/- and ₹ 2,57,502/- made by the Assessing Officer by disallowing the claim of the bad debts written off which were declared on accrual basis in earlier assessment years and deduction under Sec .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates