TMI Blog2020 (5) TMI 617X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Ld. DR could not point out any change in facts or law which would have warranted any interference on the part of us. In the absence of the same, we note that the issue under dispute had been dealt elaborately by the Ld. CIT(A), supra which we agree and thus in our considered opinion, does not call for any interference. - I.T.A. No. 1503/Kol/2018 - - - Dated:- 28-2-2020 - Shri J. Sudhakar Reddy, AM And Shri A. T. Varkey, JM For the Appellant : Shri Supriyo Pal, JCIT, Sr. DR For the Respondent : Shri Ravi Tulsiyan, FCA ORDER PER SHRI A.T.VARKEY, JM This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-3, Kolkata dated 14.05.2018 for AY 2014-1. 2. Ground no. 1 of revenue s appeal is against t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case of Biocon Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported in 35 taxmann.com 335 and also by the decision of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for the AY 2013-14 in ITA No. 946/Kol/2017 dated 07.12.2018, so he urged before the bench to dismiss the appeal of revenue on this score. 5. We have heard rival submissions and gone through the facts and circumstances of the case. We note that the issue is regarding deletion of disallowance of additional ESOP expenses of ₹ 65,19,000/-. We note that this issue stands squarely covered by the decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd. Vs. DCIT reported in 35 taxmann.com 335 and also by the decision of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for the AY 2013-14 in ITA No. 946/Kol/2017 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... difference, loss or gain arising on conversion of the outstanding liability at the closing rate should be recognized in the profit and loss account for the reporting period which has been duly recognized by the assessee but in the computation of income the MTM profit have been deducted which, according to him, is against the decision of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Woodward Governor India (P) Ltd. (2009) 179 Taxman 326 (SC). In view of the above, deduction of ₹ 1,97,06,000/- claimed by the assessee in its computation of income was disallowed by the AO and added back to the total income of the assessee. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who deleted the addition as made by AO by observing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enditure in the books. While filing of return for the year, the appellant reversed both the entries resulting in net reduction of ₹ 283.30 lacs. The appellant has produced copy of computation of income for both the years to support its contention. Thus it can be seen that the deduction is on account of reversal of entry which had been considered as part of income in A. Y 2012-13. Considering this, there is no justification in adding back to the amount of ₹ 283.30 lacs. The addition of ₹ 283.30 lacs is accordingly deleted. It is observed that in this case the appellant offered to tax a sum of ₹ 522.86 lacs on account of reversal of MTM provision in AYr 2012-13. The said loss was reversed in the last assessme ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
