9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 1144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... orrect in law and on the facts of the case & prayed for deletion. 2. That assessee be allowed Rs 19,08,26,076 as additional depreciation u/s 32(1) (iia) of preceding year (F.Y. 10-11) which was claimed 'A only & assessee is eligible to claim the balance A in current financial year (F.Y. 11-12) & prayed for it allowance in the current financial year. 3. That raising of demand of Rs 36,41,59,287/- against the assessee ignoring BIFR order is bad in law and on the facts of the case & need to be deleted. 4. That assessee's income is to be reduced by Rs 2,24,00,00,000 being earned against sale of FSI, which isn't taxable income & prayed for its reduction." 3. The revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: "1. Whether in facts an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10(34) of the Act. The assessee has disallowed an amount of Rs. 905915/-. A suo moto u/s 14A. The total investment made by the assessee was Rs. 21.38 crores. The AO disallowed interest expenditure of Rs. 29,20,847/- attributable to income which does not form part of the total income. Before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted the details of interest of Rs. 48,67,65,130/- as under: Details of Interest Particulars Amount Remarks Interest on Loan from GO1 43,34,31,714 Working capital assistance from Govt. to run Sick Mills Interest on Bank Loans for Working Capital 29,26,573 For working capital requirements of NTC Interest on trade credits 15,13,299 Interest paid to Selling Agents against their Security Deposit Interest on cot ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not form part of total income; and (ii) an amount equal to one per cent of the annual average of the monthly average of the opening and closing balances of the value of investment, income from which does not or shall not form part of total income : Provided that the amount referred to in clause (i) and clause (ii) shall not exceed the total expenditure claimed by the assessee.] (3) [***]" (ii) In a case where the assessee has incurred expenditure by way of interest during the previous year which is not directly attributable to any particular income or receipt an amount computed in accordance with the following formula, namely: AXB C Where A=amount of expenditure by way of interest other than the amount of interest included in cl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the first time has taken up the issue of capital gains arising out of sale of FSI before the ld CIT(A). The same is as under:- "Reduction in income by Rs 2,24,00,00,000 against sale of FSI: - The brief facts of the case are that assessee Computed Capital Gain considering it as Sales Price. In this regard it is respectfully submitted in the very case of CIT Vs. Sambhaji Nagar coop Hsg Society Ltd, ITA No. 1356 of 2012, Date of Order: 11.12.2014, by Hon'ble Bombay High Court held that sale of FSI isn't taxable. Please note that this order is after the date of filling of return as on 29.09.2012 & this fact was duly submitted to Ld. AO as per paper book page No. 133 vide point no 4 (Not repeated here again for the sake of brevity), which was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in the following cases, if any expenses (or Excessive Income) isn't claimed (or reduced) in the ROI, it can be allowed (or reduced) by A. O. during assessment proceedings:- Jute Corporation Of India Ltd. vs CIT (1991 (187) ITR 688 (SC)) National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. vs CIT (1998 (229) ITR 383 (SC) CIT vs Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholder (P) Ltd. (ITA NO 3908 of 2010)" 9. The ld. CIT(A) held that the above referred order Hon'ble Mumbai High Court dismissed Revenue's appeal by holding that the appeal does not raise any substantial question of law. No principle are laid down in the said order of Hon'ble Mumbai High Court. The same does not help the case of the assessee. 10. The ld CIT(A) held that during the appellant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 08-09 2009-10 Amount 4,22,94,313.00 2,28,94,60,659.00 6,38,82,722.00 A.Y. 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 Amount 5,20,36,911.00 Income(Net) 2,45,59,430.00 A.Y. 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 Amount Income (Net) 1,57,47,097.00 49,31,02,928.00 14. The coordinate bench of Tribunal while deciding the issue for A.Y. 2009-10 held as under: ".........The assessee has incurred prior period expenses of Rs. 16,61,43,5087 It had prior period income of Rs. 10,22,60,782/-. The net prior amount of Rs. 63,88,272/-, was already added by the assessee in the computation of income. Thus the finding of the first Appellate Authority that there is a double addition of Rs. 63,88,272/- is factually correct. As far as the balance amount is concerned the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
