9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (6) TMI 348X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it was incurred. The Court further observed that where the assessee has spread over the expenditure for six years and 1/6th is claimed, the department should not have objected such spreading over. Thus once the expenditure is accepted as “Revenue Expenditure”, then it is upto the assessee that whether to claim the expenditure in one year or to spread over the said expenditure as per the enduring benefit available with them. - Decided in favour of assessee. Disallowance u/s.14A - Held that:- As found that the assessee has earned dividend income from one company only, the assessee does not require to incur any specific expenditure to maintain the investment portfolio, we direct AO to restrict the disallowance to the extent of 5% of the di ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . The Ld. CIT (A) ought to have given direction for revision of the assessment for the A.Y.2009-10 and allowed total expenditure of ₹ 4,74,87,291/- when CIT(A) have view that this expenses cannot be deferred. 6. The Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in confirming the disallowance ₹ 3,43,937/- u/s. 14A of the Act. 7. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the charging of interest u/s. 234A, 234B, 234C, 234D of income Tax Act 1961. 8. On the facts and circumstances of case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the charging of initiation of penalty u/s. 271 (1) (c) of Income Tax Act 1961. 9. The Appellant craves leave to add further grounds or to amend or alter the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in the immediately preceding year i.e. A.Y. 2010-11 on 1/5th basis, it's not allowed in the immediately subsiding assessment year i.e. A.Y. 2011-12 and at the same time, full expenditure of ₹ 4.75 Crores is not allowed/ignored for the A.Y. 2009-10 and A.Y.2010-11. 7. We have considered rival contentions and found that assessee has incurred expenditure in the form of processing fees paid to bank for obtaining loan from the Bank for five years. The expenditure incurred for obtaining the loan was revenue in nature, therefore, ought to have been allowed in the year of incurring itself. However, assessee has claimed 1/5th of the expenditure in the preceding Assessment Year 2010-11 i.e., the year in which it was incurred as Revenu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... egotiating with the banks and financial institutions, which eventually helped the reduction of the interest burden of the assessee. The Assessing Officer held that the assessee would derive benefit of enduring nature as a result of the corporate debt restructuring exercise and treated all the expenses as capital and disallowed them. The Commissioner (Appeals) held that the expenditure could not be considered to have an enduring benefit. The Tribunal held the expenditure revenue in nature and spread it over a period. On appeal held that for the waiver of the loan, payment had been made to the financial consultants. This was for the purpose of business and was allowable under section 37(1) of the Act. Once the expenditure was held to be reven ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
