TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 253X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the Act") dated 30/01/2014 relevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2011-12. 2. Following Grounds have taken by the revenue: "(1) The ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 76,43,540/- made u/s.35(2AB) of the Act despite the fact that the assessee got approval from DSIR in the F.Y.2011-12 i.e. relevant to A.Y.2012-13 and also the weighted deduction was limited to 150% only. (2) The Ld.CIT(A) wrongly placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Claris Life Science Ltd, 326 ITR 251 as same was rendered on different facts. (3) The ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition to the extent of Rs. 10,50,282/- out of disallowa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d for treated separately in the statement of income. R&D Division expenses are allowable 200% u/s.35(2AB) - R&D Division of the assessee company has been grant approval by authority." 3.2 But ld. AO was not satisfied with the reply given by the assessee company and he made an addition of Rs. 76,43,540/-. 4. It is seen that the assessee has earned dividend income to the tune of Rs. 51.67,750/- but no disallowance u/s. 14A was made. It is further observed that the assessee has made investment of Rs. 18,94,33,151/- as on 31.03.2011. The assessee has claimed interest of Rs. 9,440/-. In addition to this, some administrative/other expenses are also admitted to be incurred to earn tax free income. In this regard the assessee vide letter dated 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g through the reply submitted by the assessee company, ld. AO was not satisfied with the contention of the assessee and he made an addition of Rs. 10,90,955/- 5. During the year under consideration, it is observed that the assessee has claimed depreciation @ 15% on 'Office Equipment'. Total depreciation of Rs. 37,811/- has been claimed on such equipments, which has been categorized under the head 'Others'. These items clearly fall under 'Furniture & Fixtures' instead of 'Plant & Machinery' on which depreciation is available @15%. Accordingly, vide letter dated 16.12.2013, the assessee was requested to let this office know as to why depreciation should not be, restricted to 10% only, The assessee, vide submission dat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ear the assessee company has claimed depreciation on WDV of Motor Car at 50% amounting to Rs. 1,52,549/-. The assessee submitted that Item (via) in Appendix I has been inserted w.e.f. 01.04.2009 (A.Y.2009-10) and on wards (vide Income Tax Third Amendment) Rules, 2009 has been extended to 01.10.2009 w.e.f. 01.04.2010 (A.Y.2010-11 and onwards) vide Income-tax (Eleventh Amendment) Rules 2009 312 ITR(ST)330." 7.1 But ld. AO was not satisfied with the contention of the assessee and he made and addition of Rs. 8,38,246/-. 8. Against the said order assessee preferred first statutory appeal before the ld.CIT(A) who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 9. We have gone through the relevant record and impugned order. So far as ground no.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... est paid by the assessee was subsequently and assessee was having sufficient interest free fund to cover up the investment earning exempt income. Therefore, we are of the considered opinion that provisions of Section 14A are not attracted. However, as decided by the ld. CIT(A) that salary paid to C.S. Christian, which works out to Rs. 40,713/- is upheld. Therefore, we upheld the decision of the ld. CIT(A) and we are not incline to interfere in the order passed by the ld.CIT(A). Thus, this ground of revenue is dismissed. 11. So far disallowance of excess depreciation of Rs. 12,634/- on office equipment is concerned. Ld. AO has discussed the same in his order at Para No.4 and Ld. CIT(A) has discussed in Para No.6.2. In this regard, assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|