2016 (1) TMI 1454 - AT - Income Tax

Short deduction of TDS - TDS u/s 194J OR 194I - disallowance u/s. 40(a)(ia) relating to VSAT and lease line payments - CIT(A) gave partial relief to the assessee directing the A.O to give proportionate benefit of the TDS already deducted and paid in time and disallowed the balance amount. - HELD THAT - We find that an identical issue was considered by the Tribunal in assessee s own case in A.Y. 2008-09 2015 (9) TMI 1696 - ITAT AHMEDABAD - findings of the Tribunal can be found at Para 3 of its order. Wherein it has followed the decision of the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Prayas Engineering Ltd. 2014 (11) TMI 1086 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT and also relied upon the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of S.K. Tekriwal 2012 (12) TMI 873 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT - Decided in favour of assessee. Addition on account of Bad Debts - HELD THAT - As decided in assessee's own case CIT-A after considering the facts and the submissions and drawing support from the decision of Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bonanza Portfolio Ltd. 2009 (8) TMI 636 - DELHI HIGH COURT and also Rameshchandra D. Chokshi i 2010 (8) TMI 1140 - ITAT AHMEDABAD correctly deleted the additions Conversion of shares from stock in trade to investment - A.O was of the opinion that the conversion should have been at the fair market value and took the market value of the shares converted from stock in trade to investment and computed the same and added the same to the return of income of the assessee - CIT-A deleted the addition - HELD THAT - We find that the First Appellate Authority has given a well reasoned and researched order by relying upon the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Sir Kikabhai Premchand 1953 (10) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT . We also find that reliance on the decision of Dhanuka Sons 1978 (7) TMI 22 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT is well founded. Therefore no interference is called for.

Summary

Issues:
Cross appeals by Revenue and Assessee against CIT(A) order for AY 2009-2010.

Analysis:
1. Issue 1 - Proportionate TDS Addition:
- Revenue appealed against CIT(A) decision to delete TDS addition under section 40(a)(ia).
- Tribunal referred to previous case and High Court decisions.
- Tribunal upheld CIT(A) decision based on precedents. Revenue's appeal dismissed.

2. Issue 2 - Bad Debts Addition:
- Revenue challenged deletion of bad debts addition.
- Assessee provided details justifying bad debts claim.
- CIT(A) relied on Delhi High Court and Tribunal decisions to delete the addition.
- Tribunal confirmed CIT(A) decision based on previous case findings. Revenue's appeal dismissed.

3. Issue 3 - Conversion of Stock to Investment:
- Revenue disputed deletion of addition due to stock conversion.
- Assessee justified conversion as book entry with no profit until shares sold.
- CIT(A) referred to Supreme Court and Tribunal decisions to support deletion.
- Tribunal upheld CIT(A) decision based on legal precedents. Revenue's appeal dismissed.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed Revenue's appeals in all three issues, upholding the decisions of the CIT(A) based on legal precedents and established case law. The appeals were disposed of in favor of the Assessee, emphasizing the importance of legal reasoning and precedents in tax matters.