9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 1935X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... common order. 2. Let's first take Revenue's appeal in I.T.A. No.2572/Chny/2017. 3. The first issue arises for consideration is disallowance of Rs.18,82,690/- towards payment of royalty. 4. We heard Shri Sailendra Mamidi, the Ld. Departmental Representative and Shri R. Sivaraman, the Ld.counsel for the assessee. It was brought to the notice of the Bench that a similar royalty paid by the assessee was considered by this Tribunal for assessment year 2012-13 in I.T.A. No.728/Mds/2016, a copy of which is available at page 32 of the paper-book and found that the payment was made for the right to use the Logo, hence it has to be allowed as revenue expenditure. In view of the order of this Tribunal for assessment year 2012-13 in the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... same has to be disallowed even before introduction of Section 14A and Rule 8D(2). According to the Ld. D.R., the Parliament by way of Section 14A of the Act has made it clear that the expenditure incurred with an intention to earn exempted income cannot be allowed, hence the disallowance was made as per the method prescribed under Rule 8D(2). Therefore, according to the Ld. D.R., the direction given by the CIT(Appeals) to restrict the disallowance to taxable income is not justified. 7. We heard Shri R. Sivaraman, the Ld.counsel for the assessee also. The Madras High Court in the case of Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2017) 77 taxmann.com 257 observed that tax cannot be levied in vacuum. In case no income was earned, there cannot be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee, submitted that this issue was decided by this Tribunal against the assessee in I.T.A. No.2407/Mds/2016. We have carefully gone through the order of this Tribunal in I.T.A. No.2407/Mds/2016. The Tribunal found that the interest was charged on the excess amount refunded by the assessee while processing return under Section 143(1) of the Act. While proceeding under Section 143(1) of the Act, the amount refunded to the assessee was considered as non-payment of tax and interest was charged for the period for which the assessee was holding the amount. Therefore, this Tribunal confirmed similar order of the CIT(Appeals). Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
