TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1262X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ations. He also mentioned that in remand proceedings, the AO can also adjudicate the issue relating to allowing the said debts as business loss. We order accordingly and direct the AO to adjudicate the issue afresh after considering the material placed before him even it means furnishing of additional evidences for the first time before him. Accordingly, ground No.2 is allowed for statistical purposes. Export promotion expenses - Disallowance of claim of the assessee primarily for want of details - Claim of the assessee that the said amount constitutes reimbursement of expenses - HELD THAT:- We find it relevant to remand this issue also to the file of the Assessing Officer for want of relevant facts. AO shall adjudicate this issue afre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals)-I, Coimbatore,(Camp office at Chennai) dated 3.10.2012, for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The grounds raised by the Revenue are found to be argumentative despite concising of the grounds of appeal. The main grounds as stated by the assessee are Ground Nos.2, 3 4 and the same read as under: 2. The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of amount written off as irrecoverable amounting to ₹ 41,37,600/-. 3. The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of export promotion expenses amounting to ₹ 21,00,000/-. 4. The Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in confirming the disallowance of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee with the said undertakings and therefore, the claim of the assessee should be allowed in full. However, the assessee could not produce any details such as copies of invoices to prove the claim relating to the claim of discounts. Further, it is the reasoning of the CIT(A) which is evident from para 6.3 of the impugned order, that if the discounts are given in a particular year, they are required to be debited in the relevant year only. The relevant lines in this regard read as under: If the discounts were given in a particular year, the discounts have to be debited in the relevant yar only. It is not the case of the appellant that the total invoice was offered as income and the balance to be recovered, if any, from the customer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the ld. Counsel submitted that the particulars in question belong to old assessment years. He is not sure if he is successful in supplying the requisite details. However, the ld. Counsel is fair in submitting that attempt will be made if one more chance is granted by way of remanding the issue of claim of bad debts to the file of Assessing Officer for fresh examination. 9. Before us, on this issue, the ld. DR submitted that the debtors are Government undertakings and the failure of the assessee in furnishing the relevant details for demonstrating that the debts involved are merely discounts negotiated with Government undertakings is undisputed. Therefore, the claim of the assessee should not be allowed unless the nature of debts are est ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itutes reimbursement of expenses. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that identical issue came up for adjudication before the Tribunal in one of the group cases of the assessee (M/s Bimetal Bearings Ltd.) in I.T.A.Nos.89 and 90/Mds/2015 for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 dated 22.5.2015. Further he mentioned that this issue may also be remanded to the file of the Assessing Officer for adjudication considering the lack of detailed discussion on this issue so as to prove that such amount constitutes reimbursement. The Assessing Officer did not allow the claim of the assessee primarily for want of details. The same is evident from the contents of para 6. The CIT(A) also confirmed the same. It is the opinion of the CIT(A) that the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of CIT vs Sundaram Clayton Ltd, 321 ITR 69 (Mad) and CIT vs Amway India Enterprises, 65 DTR 313 (Del) in support of its claim and submitted that the expenditure of ₹ 2 lakhs on computer software should be allowed as revenue expenditure. It is the submission of the assessee (para 8.2 of the impugned order) that the said software relates to crash recovery software and the same falls in revenue field. On the other hand, the CIT(A) has held that the same falls in capital field again without passing a speaking order on the issue. 14. On hearing both the parties and going through the orders of the Assessing Officer and the CIT(A), we find that there is no relevant facts on the record to adjudicate if the said expenditure falls in rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
