Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (12) TMI 1499 - ITAT MUMBAIDepreciation in respect of residential properties - HELD THAT:- As perused the order of the Tribunal for the A.Y. 2004-05 [2019 (4) TMI 1809 - ITAT MUMBAI] wherein the Tribunal decided this issue in favour of the assessee - as observed that the Tribunal while disposing off appeal for the A.Y. 2005-06 [2019 (4) TMI 1809 - ITAT MUMBAI] to A.Y. 2007-08 directed the Assessing Officer to allow the depreciation as claimed by the assessee on residential premises, however, it was also directed to verify the fact as to whether deduction U/s.24(a) was claimed by the assessee or not and if it is claimed the same is to be disallowed. Similar view has been taken by the Tribunal in [2019 (11) TMI 1368 - ITAT MUMBAI] for the A.Y. 2008-09 and A.Y. 2009-10 by order [2019 (11) TMI 1368 - ITAT MUMBAI]. As the facts being identical respectfully following the said decision, we direct the Assessing Officer to carry out similar exercise as directed Disallowance of amortization of premium paid on leasehold land has been decided in favour of the Revenue in own case in [2019 (11) TMI 1368 - ITAT MUMBAI] for the A.Y. 2008-09 and A.Y. 2009-10 . Disallowance of depreciation on toll road - Addition made towards notional interest in respect of toll road from Madhya Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation - HELD THAT:- We restore this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to decide the issue following the directions of the Tribunal for the A.Y. 2005-06 to 2007-08. [2019 (4) TMI 1809 - ITAT MUMBAI] This ground is allowed for statistical purpose. Disallowance of interest on loan given to IL & FS employee welfare trust - HELD THAT:- We observe that this issue has been decided by the Tribunal for the A.Y. 2009-10 [2019 (11) TMI 1368 - ITAT MUMBAI] held that the assessee has not proved that the loan is given for the purpose of business of the assessee. Even before us the assessee could not substantiate that the loan has been given for the purpose of business of the assessee. In the circumstances, we are not inclined the disturb the finding of the Ld. CIT(A) hence, the action of the Ld.CIT(A) is sustained. Ground raised by the assessee is rejected. Double addition to income - HELD THAT:- We are inclined to restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the submissions of the assessee with reference to Books of Accounts, Profit and Loss Account and balance sheet and decide the issue in accordance with law. We make it clear that if it is proved that assessee has offered excess income as claimed by the assessee the same shall not be brought to tax as it would amount double addition, though it is an inadvertent mistake of the assessee. Disallowance of deduction u/s.36(l)(viii) - HELD THAT:- The appellant had advanced loans for infrastructural facilities to group entities which are developing the infrastructural facilities in separate company. This separate company formed as group entity develops infrastructural facility and income from this accrues to this group entities. The appellant's extended loan for development of infrastructural facilities on long term basis which is the 2nd condition which appellant has to fulfill to claim sec.36(l)(viii). As appellant is fulfilling the condition of specified entity and extending the loan for infrastructural facilities though they are group companies which are themselves developing infrastructural facilities, the appellant is eligible for deduction u/s.36(l)(viii) Mis-match in AIR - assessee has not explained the transactions and accordingly made addition u/s.69/69B/69C - HELD THAT:- No infirmity in the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A). The Assessing Officer is directed to issue notice u/s. 133(6) of the Act to the parties mentioned in AIR and if the parties confirm that they have made payments to the assessee the same shall be treated as income of the assessee. However, the Assessing Officer shall provide complete details to the assessee to rebut the confirmations which the Assessing Officer receives from the parties. Adequate opportunity shall be given to the assessee to make its submissions; in case the Assessing Officer wants to treat any amount as income of the assessee due to the mis-match in AIR. Allowing depreciation on computer software @60%.
|