TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee and in the absence of the same, find myself in agreement with the learned counsel for the assessee that disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A by invoking Rule 8D is not sustainable and the same is liable to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition of miscellaneous expenses and Puja Chanda expenses - Held that:- As regards the puja chanda expenses as find merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee that the puja chanda expenses were required to be incurred by the assessee on account of payment to various sanghas and clubs on the occasion of puja at the locations where the projects of the assessee were being developed. Moreover, the details of such expenses show that the same were incurred by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the assessee is directed against the order of Ld. CIT (Appeals) 2, Kolkata dated 11.05.2018. 2. Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee in this appeal is general which does not call for any specific adjudication. 3. The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of real estate. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 26.09.2013 declaring a total income of ₹ 31,54,860/-. In the said return, dividend income of ₹ 202/- received by the assessee was claimed to be exempt from tax and the expenses of ₹ 17,935/- incurred in relation to the said exempt income were disallowed u/s 14A of the Act. The AO however worked out such expenses by applying Rule 8D at & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nda ₹ 1,85,500/- (ii) Security Deposit ₹ 1,65,530/- (iii) CESC and post delivery expenses ₹ 8,01,921/- 6. Under the miscellaneous expenses, Puja Chanda expenses of ₹ 1,85,500/- were claimed by the assessee. According to the AO, the said expenses were not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of assessee s business and he accordingly disallowed the same. He also disallowed security deposit of ₹ 1,65,530/- paid by the assessee to CESC and Post Delivery Expenses of ₹ 8,01,921/-. In this regard, he rejected the explanation of the assessee that the said expenses we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ject and the same therefore was allowable as deduction as claimed by the assessee. Similarly, the Post Delivery Expenses were duly explained by the assessee as the expenses for doing some finishing work which had remained incomplete mainly for the common area facilities after delivery of flats and this explanation offered by the assessee was rejected by the AO without giving any reasons whatsoever. Keeping in view the nature of the expenditure as well as the nature of assessee s business, I am of the view that the expenses incurred by the assessee on account of security deposit paid to CESC as well as Post Delivery work represented part of the project expenses incurred by the assessee and the same were allowable as deduction as rightly clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
