TMI Blog2016 (6) TMI 1317X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same. No distinguishable facts has been placed on record. No any other order which is contrary to the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in [2016 (2) TMI 157 - ITAT MUMBAI] in the assessee’s own case has been produced. Therefore, in the said circumstance by following the observations of co-ordinate bench we are of the view that the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the expenses and allowed the same. Addition u/s.40A(9) - contribution to employees’ recreation club - reimbursement of expenses incurred by the club for the welfare of the employees. - Held that:- CIT(A) by following ITAT order and also after considering the order passed by Assessing Officer for A.Y.2006- 07 in the set aside proceedings, deleted the addition made in this year. - learned CIT(A) has passed the order judiciously and correctly which does not require to be interfere with at this appellate stage. - I.T.A. No.6495/Mum/2013 - - - Dated:- 29-6-2016 - SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM Assessee by: Shri S. Venkatraman Department by: Shri Chandrajit Singh O R D E R PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM: The revenue has filed the present appeal against the order dated 08 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n 30.11.2009. The assessee is an entity fully owned by Government of India. The company is engaged in the business of Insurance of Export Credit Risk of exporters in India and extending different types of insurance / guarantee covers to the banks and financial institutions in India for facilitating the credit facilities to the exporters. Being in the business of insurance, the income of assessee is liable to be computed u/s.44 of the Act read with First Schedule and Rule 6E of the Income Tax Rules. The income of the assessee was assessed by the Assessing Officer to the tune of ₹ 16,32,24,66,870/- under the normal provision of the Act and an amount of ₹ 699,61,02,649/- u/s. 115JB of the Act. Since the assessee was not satisfied with the certain additions, therefore assessee filed the appeal before the learned CIT(A) who allowed the same, therefore, the revenue has filed the present appeal and raised the grounds mentioned above before us. ISSUE NO.1 2 :- 4. Issue no.1 and 2 are interconnected, therefore are being taken up together for adjudication. The revenue has challenged the deletion of addition of ₹ 2,04,39,081/- to the total amount which has been re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income of the assessee as the same was held in the capacity of fiduciary for the exporters / banks, pending identification of the exporters and their share. Accordingly, this amount has been ordered to be deleted. Thereafter, the matter in this regard came before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.1971/Mum/2011 dated 11.12.2015 in the assessee s own case for A.Y.2007-08 wherein it has been held that this amount was not the income of the assessee and upheld the finding of the learned CIT(A) in the assessee s own case. Accordingly, it is apparent that this ground has been squarely covered by the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in the assessee s own case for A.Y.2007-08 and therefore, we are of the view that on this ground learned CIT(A) has passed the order judiciously and correctly which does not required to be interfere with at this appellate stage. Accordingly, these issues are decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. ISSUE NO.3 4 :- 5. The revenue has challenged the deletion of software expenses to the tune of ₹ 26,59,715/- and disallowance of ₹ 10,63,886/- being net amount of capitalised and depreciation allowe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o.1971/Mum/2011 in the assessee s own case has been produced. Therefore, in the said circumstance by following the observations of co-ordinate bench we are of the view that the learned CIT(A) has rightly deleted the expenses and allowed the same. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of assessee and against the revenue. ISSUE NO.5 6 :- 6. According to these issues the revenue has challenged the deletion of addition to the tune of ₹ 10,00,000/- made u/s.40A(9) of the Act. The learned representative of the department has argued that the learned CIT(A) has wrongly deleted the said addition made u/s.40A(9) of the Act to the tune of ₹ 10,00,000/-. On the other hand learned representative of the assessee has argued that this issue has also been covered by the assessee s own case in ITA No.924/Mum/2010 dated 27.04.2011 relevant to the A.Y.2006-07. The finding on this issue has been given by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in para no.3 of the said order which is hereby reproduced below:- 3. We have perused the records and considered the matter carefully. The dispute is regarding allowability of expenditure incurred by the assessee on account of contribut ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
