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

2017 (4) TMI 870 - ITAT JAIPUR

2017 (4) TMI 870 - ITAT JAIPUR - TMI - Contribution to State Renewal Fund - allowable expenditure - Held that:- We find that the similar issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the judgment of the Hon’ble Rajasthan High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Rajasthan State Seeds Corporation Ltd.[2016 (9) TMI 59 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT ] as held any normal expenditure for the welfare and benefit of the employees is allowable expenditure under section 37(1), the Tribunal has come to a f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

2002-03 with respect to maintenance charges. The ld. CIT(A) has given further finding of fact that an amount with respect to the head Officer pertains to wrong entry of interest income in FY 2002-03 & 2003-04 with respect to toll project on capital deployed by the appellant. This finding of fat is not controverted by the ld. D/R by placing any material on record. We are in agreement with the observations of the ld. CIT(A) that reversal of income wrongly declared in earlier years, is allowable. H .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Counsel for the assessee. Therefore, the ground raised in the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. - Disallowance of expenditure on account of depositing the employee’s contribution beyond the prescribed time limit - Held that:- The issue is no more res integra. The issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. State Bank of Bikaner & Jaipur (2014 (12) TMI 65 - RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT) and also in the case of CIT vs. Jaipur Vidyut Vitran Nigam Lt .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in holding contribution of ₹ 20,00,000/- to State Renewal Fund as an allowable expenditure though it is not an actual expenditure. 2. Where on the facts and circumstances of the case in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition made by the AO by disallowing ₹ 1,97,491/- of prior period expenses. 3. Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) was justified restricting the disallowance of deduction u/ .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ovision of section 43B and not by section 36(1) (va) r.w.s. 2(24) (x) of the IT Act. 6. The appellant craves its rights to add, amend or alter any of the grounds on or before the hearing. 2. Briefly stated the facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act) was framed vide order dated 31st January 2015, while framing the assessement, the Assessing Officer made ad .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ng Officer in respect of contribution towards State Renewal Fund, prior period expenses and delay in deposit of PF contribution. However ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance of deduction u/s 80IA to ₹ 9.24 lakhs against ₹ 3,84,50,924/-. Against this, the Revenue has preferred the present appeal. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that all the issues are covered in favour of the assessee. This fact is not controverted by the ld. Departmental Representatives. 4 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

. Therefore, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 5. Ground no. 2 is against deletion of addition made on account of disallowance of prior period expenses of ₹ 1,97,491/-. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that, this issue is also covered. The ld. DR conceded the facts, however, he supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 5.1 We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material available on record. The Co-ordinate Bench in assessee s own case 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

d an amount of ₹ 55,28,017/- with respect to the Jodhpur unit are reversal of entries of income, wrongly made in the preceding years. With respect to the head office, an amount of ₹ 96,08,000/- pertains to reversal of double income booked in F.Y. 2002-03 with respect to maintenance charges. Further an amount of ₹ 2,94,25,000/- with respect to the head office pertains to wrong entry of interest income in F.Y. 2002-03 & 2003-04 with respect to toll projects on capital deploye .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ith respect to the expenditure of ₹ 16,33,880/- pertaining to the Bikaner Unit, this expenditure has been incurred on shifting of plan in an earlier year, which was originally recoverable from PWD but since the work got withdrawn and the amount could not be recovered from PWD, this amount has been debited in this years. This contention of the appellant is acceptable. In view, of the above discussion, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer, on account of the above prior period expen .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

(A) has given a finding of fact that with respect to the Head Office an amount of ₹ 96,08,000/- pertains to reversal of double income booked in F.Y. 2002-03 with respect to maintenance charges. The ld. CIT(A) has given further finding of fact that an amount of ₹ 2,94,25,000/- with respect to the head Officer pertains to wrong entry of interest income in FY 2002-03 & 2003-04 with respect to toll project on capital deployed by the appellant. This finding of fat is not controverted .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ssee reiterated the submissions as made in the written submissions. Ld. Departmental Representatives is conceded the facts, however he supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 6.1 We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material available on record. We find that the Co-ordinate Bench in assessee s own case in pertaining to the assessment year 2011-12 in ITA No. 558/JP/2016, decided the issue by observing as under:- 8.2 We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material avail .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

rged towards income disclosed from various toll road projects eligible for claiming deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. He observed that assessee has claimed total 8 toll road/bridge projects eligible for deduction u/s 80IA of the Act within the meaning of section 80IA(4)(i) of the Act for developing, operating and maintaining of infrastructure facility i.e. Road/Bridge. These 8 projects are : (i) Bikaner Bypass, (ii) Hanumangarh-Suratgarh Road, (iii) Hanumangarh- Shriganganagar Road, (iv) Massi Brid .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

udes road & bridge projects; as such the assessee was asked to show cause and explain as to why the establishment and administrative expense of ₹ 38,73,92,132/- should not be allocate proportionately to road/Bridge projects in proportion to their income of ₹ 23,00,24,830/- with total income of ₹ 64,78,66,500/- The assessee, in response to this query, made a detailed submission. However, the submissions of the assessee were not found acceptable by the AO. The AO, therefore, .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

80IA, as if these projects were automatically set up and running without any strategic planning, management, directions, supervision, marketing support, regular contract awarding, works tendering, control etc. by the head office/branch offices. The administrative, head office and other expenses have a direct nexus with the running of road/bridge projects of the assessee situated at various places and, therefore, the same are deductible on proportionate basis in computing the profits and gains f .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

; 8,20,34,909/-. The ld. CIT (A) by doing so has observed as under:- 5.5. The appellant has stated that while apportioning the expenditure, the Assessing Officer has wrongly taken the total turnover as ₹ 64,78,66,570/- whereas the correct turnover is ₹ 4,38,13,34,652/-, reflected in the inner column of Schedule-G of the final accounts relating to operating receipts. If the inner column of Schedule-G pertaining to operating receipts is totaled, the gross turnover amounts to ₹ 69 .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

98,40,588/-. 5.7. The appellant has stated that administrative expenses incurred at the head office of ₹ 6,05,47,731/- do not related to BOT projects. Looking to the nature of administrative expenses, this contentions of the appellant is without any basis and cannot be accepted. The administrative expenses which need to be apportioned to the BOT projects is ₹ 6,05,47,731/- ₹ 1,80,00,500/- = ₹ 4,25,46,931/- (expenditure is ₹ 1,80,00,500/- has been disallowed by the a .....

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