2014 (1) TMI 1262 - AT - Income Tax

Deletion of tax liability u/s 115JB of the Act Rebate u/s 88E of the Act Held that - The decision in CIT Vs Horizon Capital Ltd. 2011 (10) TMI 489 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT - The CIT(A) accepted that the facts of the case are covered by the decision of Mumbai Special Bench and allowed the claim of bad debts to the tune and on the grievance of the assessee relating to the calculation of tax on book profit, the Ld. CIT(A) accepted the assessee s submission that the issue at hand is covered by the decision of Bangalore Bench of ITAT in the case of Horizon Capital Ltd. Vs ITO and directed the AO to allow rebate u/s. 88E for STT paid by the assessee from the income tax on the income computed u/s. 115JB of the Act - This is the mode in which tax already paid is handed back at the time of final computation Decided against Revenue. Deletion of bad debts made Held that - The decision in The Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Shri Shreyas S. Morakhia 2012 (3) TMI 103 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT followed - the requirements of section 36(2)(i) are fulfilled where a part thereof is taken into account in computing the income of the assessee thus, the assessee was entitled to deduction by way of bad debts under section 36(1)(vii) read with section 36(2) in respect of the amount which could not be recovered from its clients in respect of transactions effected by him on behalf of his clients Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deletion of tax liability under section 115JB.
2. Deletion of addition on bad debts.

Issue 1: Deletion of tax liability under section 115JB

The appeal by the Revenue challenged the order of Ld. CIT(A) regarding the tax liability under section 115JB for the assessment year 2008-09. The Revenue contended that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the tax liability under section 115JB and in allowing rebate u/s. 88E for securities transaction tax paid. The Assessing Officer observed discrepancies in the tax calculations by the assessee, leading to a difference in tax payable under normal provisions and section 115JB. The AO invoked section 115JB to deem the Book profit as total income, resulting in a higher tax liability. The assessee argued for acceptance of tax payable as per returned income under section 88E. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the assessee's contentions based on the decision of the Bangalore Bench of ITAT in the case of Horizon Capital Ltd. vs. ITO. The ITAT, Mumbai, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in CIT vs. Horizon Capital Ltd., upheld the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) and dismissed Ground No. 1 raised by the Revenue.

Issue 2: Deletion of addition on bad debts

The second issue pertained to the deletion of the addition on bad debts amounting to Rs. 1,06,03,648/- by the Ld. CIT(A). The AO disallowed the claim of bad debts beyond the brokerage portion, questioning its compliance with Sec. 36(2) of the I.T. Act, 1961. The assessee relied on the decision of the Mumbai Special Bench in DCIT vs. Shreyas S Morakia to support its claim. The Ld. CIT(A) accepted the assessee's arguments, citing the decision in the case of Shreyas S. Morakia and allowed the claim of bad debts. The ITAT, Mumbai, upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s order based on the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Shreyas S Morakia. Ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue regarding the addition on bad debts was dismissed.

In conclusion, the ITAT, Mumbai, in the judgment addressed the issues of tax liability under section 115JB and the addition on bad debts for the assessment year 2008-09. The decision was based on the interpretation of relevant provisions of the Income Tax Act and relied on previous judicial pronouncements to resolve the disputes. The ITAT upheld the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) on both issues, dismissing the appeal filed by the Revenue.