TMI Blog2012 (3) TMI 515X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting an addition of ₹ 1,90,70,000/- ignoring the facts that the loan of the above amount was waived by M/s Pasteur Merieux Serums Vaccines in favour of assessee and also ignoring the observations of Apex Court in case of CIT Vs. T.V.Sunderam Iyengar Sons Ltd. 222 ITR 344 (SC). 3. At the time of hearing before us, it is stated by the learned DR that during the course of assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer noticed that there was waiver of loan of ₹ 1,90,70,000/- by M/s PMSV. The assessee has not offered the benefit derived by it on account of such waiver as income under Section 28(iv) of the Income-tax Act. That as per Section 28(iv), the value of any benefit or perquisite arising f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f capital asset. He further pointed out that the waiver of loan was in the year 1998 and, therefore, the taxing of the same in the year under consideration was uncalled for. He, therefore, submitted that the order of the learned CIT(A) should be sustained. 5. We have carefully considered the arguments of both the sides and perused the material placed before us. The Assessing Officer at page 2 of the assessment order has recorded the following finding:- It is seen from the Agreement for Termination of the Joint Venture dated 10.9.1998 that the M/s PMSV has irrevocably waived its right to claim from IVCOL the loan amounts of ₹ 190.70 lakhs and has absolved the IVCOL from all arbitration, litigation and further negotiation on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of account, as per Sundaram Iyengar (T.V.) and Sons Ltd. (supra), the waiver thereof may result in the income more so when it was transferred to Profit and Loss account. 7. From the above, it is evident that if the loan was taken for acquiring a capital asset, waiver thereof would not amount to any income exigible to tax. In the case under appeal before us, in the assessment order, the Assessing Officer has recorded the following finding:- The share capital was contributed by the promoters who also brought in certain amounts as loans for construction of the factory building as also for acquiring the plant and machinery for the manufacture of vaccine. It is well known fact the assessee company did not have any funds of its own and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee s own case for AY 2004-05 and the ITAT, on identical facts, set aside the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer. Therefore, the CIT(A), instead of allowing part relief to the assessee, ought to have set aside the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer. He, therefore, requested that the matter should be set aside to the file of the Assessing Officer as per the direction of the ITAT for AY 2004-05. 11. The learned counsel for the assessee fairly admitted that in AY 2004-05, the ITAT has set aside this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer. He, however, stated that the Assessing Officer has disallowed the entire expenditure claimed by the assessee in AY 2004-05 which was upheld by the learned CIT(A). Howe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... decision of the Tribunal in AY 2004-05, we do not find any justification for setting aside the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer again for doing the same exercise. It would only multiply the proceedings. No apparent mistake in the working of the CIT(A) has been pointed out. On the other hand, it was stated by the learned counsel that the assessee is a government company because more than 50% shares are held by the Central Government, Ministry of Biotechnology. Each of its expenditure is audited and the total expenditure incurred is as per the budget allocated and approved by the Ministry of Biotechnology, Government of India. Considering the totality of above facts, we do not find any justification to interfere with the orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|