TMI Blog2016 (7) TMI 1553X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r section 14A can be made even in the year where no exempt income has been earned or received by the assessee. The Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of M/s. Godrej Boyce. Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT [ 2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] held that the Assessing Officer is duty bound to determine the expenditure which had been incurred in relation to income which did not form part of the total income. In view of the above, we find no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed. Addition towards deferred revenue income - taxation of the time shares sold comprising 55% of the time share value which was treated by the assessee as advance subscription towards custome ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Chennai, dated 25.03.2015 relevant to the assessment year 2009-10. The only effective ground raised in the appeal of the assessee is with regard to confirmation of disallowance ₹.15,69,623/- made under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act in short] r.w. Rule 8 D of Income Tax Rules. In the Revenue s appeal, the only effective ground raised is with regard to deletion of addition of ₹.2,62,55,223/- towards deferred revenue income. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of sale of holiday time shares and resorts. The assessee filed its return of income for the assessment year 2009-10 on 29.09.2009 admitting NIL income. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wed the expenses attributable to management of the huge investment in the form of equity shares. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer computed the expenses of ₹.15,69,623/- under Rule 8D of the IT Rules r.w.s 14A of the Act. While making the disallowance, the Assessing Officer by relying on the order of the ld. CIT(A) for the assessment year 2008-09, wherein, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance by relying on various case law including the Delhi Special Bench decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. ITO 121 ITD 318. During the course of appellate proceedings, the AR of the assessee vehemently argued against the action of the Assessing Officer in making disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) considered the subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The issue is about taxation of the time shares sold comprising 55% of the time share value which was treated by the assessee as advance subscription towards customers facilities in the accounts. The Assessing Officer was of the view that the entire sale amount including 55% is taxable in the year of receipt. Before the Assessing Officer, the AR of the assessee relied on the decision in the case of M/s Mahindra Holidays Resorts(India) Ltd. [2010] 003 ITR 600 and argued that the Tribunal has decided the issue in favour of the assessee. However, since similar issue decided by the Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2001-02 in favour of revenue is pending before the High Court, the Assessing Officer, the above amount of de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnai B Bench (Special Bench) in the case of M/s Mahindra Holidays Resorts(India) Ltd. in ITA Nos. 2412 to 2416/Mds/2005. By following the decision of the Tribunal, the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition. The ld. DR could file any decision having reversed or modified the orders of the Tribunal. Just because, the Department has filed an appeal against the order of the Tribunal, we cannot take a different view on this account. Thus, we confirm the order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue and the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed. 10. In the result, the both the appeals filed by the assessee as well as Revenue are dismissed. Order pronounced on the 13th July, 2016 at Chennai. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
