9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (7) TMI 280 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 80(IA)(10) r.w.s 10AA(9) - not claiming interest and remuneration on partners capital - CIT-A deleted the disallowance - assessee had taken undue benefits of Section 10AA by not claiming Interest ton Capital and Remuneration to partners which resulted increase in exempted profit of the assessee - whether the CIT(A) is justified in not appreciating the fact that by not providing interest and remuneration to the partners, the firm has claimed higher profits leading to higher claim of deduction u/s 10AA of the Act and thus, devoiding the revenue from due amount of tax? - HELD THAT - We find that similar disallowances under section 80(IA) rws 10AA(9) on account of not claiming interest and remuneration on partners capital, was made by assessing officer in the assessment for A.Y. 2012-13. 2019 (5) TMI 1880 - ITAT SURAT however, on appeal the disallowances were deleted by Ld. CIT(A) by following the order of jurisdictional high Court in Alidhara Taxpro Engineering (P) Ltd 2009 (3) TMI 74 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT and decision of Tribunal in ACIT Vs Mukta Enterprises 2018 (12) TMI 597 - ITAT SURAT as held CIT(A) was right in observing that the disallowance made by the AO on account of non provision of interest and remuneration of s. 10AA of the Act deduction is erroneous and incorrect and law and facts as in the peculiar facts of the present case the partnership deed clearly lays down that no interest and remuneration is payable and hence, the first appellate authority right in deleting the disallowance made by the AO on account of non provision of interest and remuneration from amount of deduction u/s. 10AA of the Act. We are unable to see any valid reason to interfere with the same - Decided against revenue.
Issues:
1. Disallowance of deductions under Section 80(IA) r.w.s 10AA(9) for interest on capital and remuneration to partners. 2. Justification of higher profits claimed by the firm due to non-provision of interest and remuneration to partners. 3. Upholding the order of the assessing officer regarding disallowances. 4. Consistency with earlier year's assessment and Tribunal's decision. Analysis: 1. The appeal by the Revenue challenged the deletion of disallowances made by the Assessing Officer under Section 80(IA) r.w.s 10AA(9) for interest on capital and remuneration to partners. The Tribunal noted that similar disallowances were made in the assessment for the previous year, but the Ld. CIT(A) had deleted them following relevant judicial precedents. The Tribunal affirmed the decision of the Ld. CIT(A) based on the partnership deed's clear indication that no interest and remuneration were payable, hence dismissing the Revenue's grounds of appeal. 2. The Revenue argued that by not providing interest and remuneration to partners, the firm claimed higher profits leading to a higher claim of deduction under Section 10AA, thereby depriving the revenue of due tax. However, the Tribunal found that the partnership deed explicitly stated no provision for interest and remuneration, aligning with judicial decisions that such provisions are not mandatory. Therefore, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer was deemed erroneous, and the Ld. CIT(A) rightly deleted it. 3. The Tribunal considered the facts of the case, emphasizing the absence of any provision for interest and remuneration in the partnership deed. Citing relevant case law and the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court, the Tribunal upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s deletion of the disallowance. The Tribunal found no valid reason to interfere with the decision and dismissed the Revenue's grounds of appeal, affirming the Ld. CIT(A)'s order. 4. Given the consistency with the earlier year's assessment and the Tribunal's decision in the assessee's own case for the previous year, the Tribunal affirmed the Ld. CIT(A)'s order. The Tribunal concluded the hearing by announcing the order in the Virtual Court hearing, upholding the deletion of disallowances and dismissing the Revenue's appeal. This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key issues, arguments presented, judicial reasoning, and the final decision rendered by the Tribunal.
|
