TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1962X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpensation Plan - HELD THAT:- As we can see, ld. A.O. had disallowed the provision for leave encashment as no payment has been made against the said provision during the year. In the case of Bharat Earth Movers [ 2000 (8) TMI 4 - SUPREME COURT ] has held if a liability has been ascertained with a reasonable certainty and the actual quantification is not material to claim the expenditure.Therefore, respectfully following the aforesaid Hon ble Supreme Court judgment and in our considered opinion, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly granted relief to the assessee. Therefore, this ground of appeal is dismissed. Disallowance of weighted deduction u/s. 35(2AB) of recurring expenses related to building municipal taxes and salary to Mr. C. Dutt. - HELD THAT:- In this case, ld. CIT(A) has followed assessment year 2005-06 [ 2012 (7) TMI 273 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] to allow the claim - Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 238 & 259/AHD/2012 - - - Dated:- 15-1-2019 - Shri Pramod Kumar, Vice President And Shri Mahavir Prasad, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr. D.R. For the Respondent Shri S.N. Soparkar Urvashi Shodhan. ORDER PER MAHAVIR PRASA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he returned book profits. While finalizing the assessment, the Ld. Assessing Officer has made the following adjustments/disallowances to the returned income: (i) Disallowance of depreciation @ 60% on equipments connected to V-SAT of ₹ 4,27,545/-. (ii) Disallowance u/s. 14A in the nature of administrative and interest expenditure of ₹ 56,21,000/-. (iii) Disallowance of ₹ 39,08,141/- paid in respect of provision for Employee Long Term Compensation Plan. (iv) Disallowance of ₹ 12,06,824/- for garden expenses. (v) Disallowance of weighted deduction claimed u/s. 35(2AB) of the Act on recurring expenses of ₹ 60.85 lacs related to building, municipal taxes and salary to Mr. C. Dutt. 3. And against the disallowances/additions, assessee preferred first statutory appeal before the ld. CIT(A) who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Now Revenue is before us by way of an appeal. 5. First we would like to discuss the ground related to depreciation @ 60% on equipments connected to V-SAT. 6. Ld. A.O. has discussed this issue at page no. 2 3 in Para 6 and ld. CIT(A) has discussed at page no. 3 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case of ACIT vs. Hipolin Ltd. in ITA No. 4259/Ahd/2007 wherein it has been held that it has to be first presumed that the investment were made out of interest free funds available with the assessee. 14. Respectfully following the same, ld. CIT(A) has rightly restricted ₹ 5,00,000/- as administrative expenses u/s. 14A and same does not require any kind of interference at our end. Thus, we dismiss this ground of appeal of the revenue. 15. Now we come to ground no. 3 relating to deleting the disallowance of ₹ 39,08,141/- paid in respect of provision for Employee Long-term Compensation Plan. 16. Ld. A.O. has discussed this issue at page no. 17 to 19 in Para 11 and ld. CIT(A) has discussed at page no.21 to 29 in Para no. 7. 17. During the year under consideration, assessee has claimed ₹ 39,08,141/- in respect of provision made for Employee Long-term Compensation Plan and same provision was made in assessment year 2007-08 in respect of assessment year 2006-07 for the said amount relating to 2005-06. When lower authorities issued the notice to the assessee in reply, assessee stated that as the scheme of providing compensation to the employees was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as discussed at page no. 41 in Para no. 10. As we can see, in assessment year 2005-06, predecessor of the ld. CIT(A) allowed the claim regarding depreciation in respect of motor car and capitalization of interest has been allowed. As ld. CIT(A) has followed earlier year and there is no appeal by the Revenue against the said order. Therefore, we do not want to interfere in the said order. Thus, this ground is dismissed. 29. In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed. 30. ITA No. 259/Ahd/2012 Assessee s appeal. The Assessee has taken following grounds of appeal. 1.On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT(A) erred in not upholding the Assessee's claim for deduction in a sum of ₹ 268.695 lacs being 150% weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) in respect of capital expenditure of motor cars and interest ₹ 179.13 lacs. 2 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, CIT(A) erred in upholding a disallowance to the extent of ₹ 5 lacs out of the disallowance purportedly made by invoking the provisions of Section 14A of the Act. 3. The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend and/or withdraw any g ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
