9911796707
TMI Blog2011 (8) TMI 1139X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e doing the scrutiny assessment AO has disallowed an amount of ₹ 1,16,000/- by observing as under :- "5.1. It is noticed form the audited accounts that Impairment Loss for the year had been estimated and recognized at ₹ 1,29,01,000/- in relation to the two Tea estates of the assessee-company. Such losses to the extent of ₹ 1,27,85,000/- had been adjusted against the related Revaluation Reserve Balance, and the remaining loss of ₹ 1,16,000/- was debited to the profit and loss account for the year ended 31.03.2007. Amount of such loss debited to the P/L a/c in the immediately preceding year was ₹ 2,95,000/-. 5.2. In his written submission, the ld. A/R stated that it was a provision for loss which the assets ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee has reiterated the submissions made before the revenue authorities which is as under :- "The claim was explained in detail during the course of assessment. It as stated that the company appointed valuer to ascertain actual value of assets appearing at its books value from earlier years. According to their opinion the present market value of certain assets as compared to their books value is less by ₹ 1,29,01,000/-. Therefore revaluation reserve balance existing in the book at ₹ 1,27,85,000/- was reduced to nil to absorve loss to that extent. The balance of ₹ 1,16,000/- was debited in Profit & Loss A/c." Therefore he requested that the amount debited to the P&L account is to be treated as allowable expenditure. 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1961, 40% of the income distributed as dividend is liable to tax, the ld. CIT(A) should have held that 40% of total expenditure is allowed to the appellant company in computing total income and should therefore be considered as Taxable Fringe Benefits provided or deemed to have been provided for the purpose of Section 115WA. 4. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) is wrong and unjustified in dismissing assessee's appeal and thereby sustaining order u/s 115WE(3) of Income Tax Act, 1961 computing value of Fringe Benefit at ₹ 27,18,584/-. 5. That the appellant craves leave to add, alter, adduce or amend any ground or grounds on or before the date of hearing of the appeal." 9. The brief facts of this ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s assessee is in appeal before us . 10. At the time of hearing both the parties has fairly conceded that this issue is covered against assessee and ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal following the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Apeejay Tea Ltd. vide ITA NO.556/Kol/2011 dated 07.01.2011. 11. After hearing the rival submissions and on careful perusal of materials available on record it is observed that ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of this Tribunal in the case of Apeejay Tea Ltd. (supra) wherein the Tribunal has held as under :- "7. We have carefully considered the submissions of the Ld. Representatives of the parties and the orders of the authorities below. We have also considered the relevant provisions i.e. Section 11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
