9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (2) TMI 1252 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of depreciation of membership of Bombay Stock Exchange - Held that - We find that the First Appellate Authority while allowing the claim of depreciation on BSE card, has followed the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case 2015 (10) TMI 2019 - ITAT MUMBAI . Ground No.1 taken by the Revenue is dismissed Depreciation is to be allowed on the written down value(WDV) as defined in section 43(6)(b) of the Act. We accordingly, restore this issue to the file of the AO. The AO is directed to compute depreciation on WDV as per the provisions of law. Ground No.2 is allowed for statistical purposes. Allowance of loss on derivative transactions as non-speculative - Held that - We find that the Tribunal in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2003-04 has considered the similar issue 2015 (2) TMI 314 - ITAT MUMBAI dated 20.8.2010, wherein the Tribunal has considered this issue qua Ground No.(a) and after considering the facts and submissions at para 11, the Tribunal has dismissed the assessee s appeal. Respectfully following the decision of the coordinate bench , Ground Nos.3 to 5 are dismissed. Disallowance of client assistance charges - Held that - As in assessee s own case Tribunal has discussed the issue at length from paragraphs 8 to 15 of its order and at paragraph 15, after considering the facts and submissions held that it is not a case that falls u/s 40A of the Act. Accordingly, allowed the appeal of the assessee and dismissed revenue s appeal. Respectfully following the decision of co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal, grounds of appeal No.6 to 8 are dismissed Disallowance of transaction charges paid to Stock Exchange u/s 40(a)(ia) - Held that - This issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT V/s Kotak Securities Limited (2011 (10) TMI 24 - Bombay High Court) wherein the Hon ble High Court has observed that the revenue did not invoke relevant provisions of TDS for 10 years, therefore, the assessee could not be held to be in default for non deducting TDS on transaction charges paid to the Stock Exchange. Addition of bad debts - Held that - As perusal of the Assessment Order clearly shows that the AO has admitted it to be write off account of customers balances. However, the AO himself has accepted that the assessee has debited this amount under the head Bad Debts in it profit and loss account, therefore, treating the same as loss on Future and Option margins is totally against the facts of the case. In our considered opinion, it is nothing but bad debts and is to be allowed following the ratio laid down by he Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of TRF Limited reported (2010 (2) TMI 211 - SUPREME COURT). Accordingly, ground taken by the assessee is allowed.
Issues Involved:
Cross-appeals by Revenue and assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A) -4, Mumbai for the assessment year 2005-06. Analysis: I.T.A. No.7037/Mum/2008 (by Revenue): - Ground No.1: Disallowance of depreciation on membership of Bombay Stock Exchange. - First Appellate Authority allowed depreciation following Tribunal's decision in assessee's own case. Revenue's appeal dismissed. - Ground No.2: Disallowance of depreciation of &8377; 4.5 lakhs. - CIT(A) directed AO to compute depreciation on WDV as per law. Ground No.2 allowed for statistical purposes. - Grounds No.3 to 5: Allowance of loss on derivative transactions as non-speculative. - Tribunal in assessee's case for AY 2003-04 dismissed similar issue. Ground Nos.3 to 5 dismissed. - Grounds No.6 to 8: Disallowance of client assistance charges. - Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee in a similar case. Grounds No.6 to 8 dismissed. Revenue's appeal partly allowed. I.T.A. No.6860/Mum/2008 (by Assessee): - Ground No.1: Disallowance of bad debts. - Tribunal in AY 2004-05 decided in favor of the assessee. Ground No.1 allowed. - Ground No.2: Disallowance of transaction charges paid to Stock Exchange. - Covered in favor of the assessee by High Court decision. Addition directed to be deleted. - Ground No.3: Disallowance of &8377; 37,40,000. - AO treated it as loss on Future and Option margins, but Tribunal allowed it as bad debts. Ground No.3 allowed. - Ground No.4: Levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C. - AO directed to levy interest as per the provisions of the Act. Conclusion: - Revenue's appeal partly allowed, and assessee's appeal allowed. The judgment was pronounced on 3rd Feb, 2015.
|
