TMI Blog2017 (4) TMI 814X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee company and they have been shown as assets of the assessee company. Hence, the assessee company should be considered as owner for all practical purposes and hence it is entitled for depreciation - Decided in favour of assessee Disallowance u/s.14A - Held that:- We find that assessee has not earned any exempt income in the present assessment year. Hence on the basis of Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT), since no exempt income has been earned no disallowance u/s.14A is liable to be made. However, in this case CIT(A) has affirmed the disallowance of ₹ 69,140/-. In this view of the matter revenue cannot have any grievance. Accordingly, we uphold the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s name. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in excluding the interest of ₹ 31,07,917/- from the computation of disallowance u/s.14A, holding that interest on car loan, packing credit interest and term loan interest cannot be attributed to investment in securities, ignoring that the said interest is related to assets and not to income and therefore cannot be excluded from the gross interest. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim of prior period expenses disallowed in A.Y.2007-08, ignoring that the assessee had not made a claim in its return for the A.Y.2006-07 nor filed a revised return of claim the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... said order the revenue is in appeal before us. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. Learned departmental representative has relied upon the decision of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in case of Edwise Consultants Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.391/Mum/2011 vide order dated 19.04.2013. On the other hand, learned counsel of the assessee relied upon the order of the same assessee for subsequent assessment year vide order dated 14.10.2015 in which the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 5. On careful consideration we find that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in its order dated 14.10.2015 in the case of Edwise Consultants Pvt. Ltd. has held as under:- We have heard the parties on this issue and perused the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ingly, we set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and direct the AO to allow depreciation on vehicles. 6. Since above decision of the Tribunal has been passed after taking into account Hon ble Gujarat High Court and Hon ble Delhi High Court decisions, following the above said decisions we uphold the order of the learned CIT(A). Hence this issue is decided in favour of the assessee. Apropos Ground No. 2:- 7. On this issue the assesse had explained to the Assessing Officer as under:- During the year under assessment, our assessee has not earned any exempt income. Our assessee has not incurred any expenses for earning Nil exempt income. Our assessee has not incurred any expenses for earning Nil exempt income. T ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er:- 7.1 The assesse during the course of appellate proceedings vide letter dated 03.12.2008 stated that the assessee has disallowed an expenditure of ₹ 32,74,839/- in A.Y.2007-08 as prior period expenses. Therefore the same should be allowed as expenditure during the year as the same pertains to the A.Y. under question. 7.2 The AO did not consider the appellant s claim stating that the appellant has not filed any revised return as required in the case of Goetz India (Ltd.) 284 ITR 323. 11. Upon assessees appeal learned CIT(A) held that Assessing Officer has not doubted that the expenditure does not pertain to the year under consideration but his only objection is that the assessee has not filed the revised return. The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
