9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 544X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3. On perusal of the computation of total income, the AO noticed that the assessee-company had claimed deduction of Rs. 75,37,30,223/- u/s 80IA(4) of the Act. As per Form No. 10CCB, the date of commencement of operation/activity of the undertaking was January 2009. The impugned assessment year is the 4th one, wherein the assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80IA of the Act, the first year being AY 2010-11. The Assessing Officer (AO) has disallowed the claim of the assessee by holding that Container Freight Station (CFS) is not an eligible infrastructure facility as provided in Explanation to section 80IA(4) of the Act. As per the AO the same is neither a port nor an inland port as mentioned in the said Explanation. Therefore, the AO denied the above claim of deduction u/s 80IA made by the assessee. 4. In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) followed the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 6110 & 6111/Mum/2014 dated 04.08.2016 and directed the AO to allow deduction of Rs. 75,37,30,223/- u/s 80IA of the Act. 5. Before us, the Ld. DR supports the order passed by the AO. On the other hand, the Ld. counsel of the assessee submits that the above issue is decided in favour of the assessee by the judgment ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rmed as Inland Ports within the meaning of Section 80-IA of the IT Act, the appellant herein is unable to put forward any reasonable explanation as to why these notifications and communication should not be relied to hold ICDs as Inland Ports. Unless shown otherwise, it cannot be held that the term 'Inland Ports' is used differently under Section 80-IA of the IT Act. All these facts taken together clear the position beyond any doubt that the ICDs are Inland Ports and subject to the provisions of the Section and deduction can be claimed for the income earned out of these Depots. However, the actual computation is to be made in accordance with the different Notifications issued by the Customs department with regard to different ICDs located at different places. 23. In light of the forgoing discussion, we are of the view that judgment of the High Court does not call for any interference and, hence, the appeal is accordingly dismissed." 6.1 Facts being identical, we follow the above decision and dismiss the 1st ground of appeal. 7. The 2nd ground of appeal On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made on account of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (Growth Funds) - 21,12,19,947 Investments on which Rule 8D(2)(iii) is to be applied 23,30,69,473 20,25,71,488 Average Value of Investments Rs.21,78,20,480 0.5% of Average Value of Investments Rs.10,89,102 11. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. In respect of the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii), we find from audited accounts that the assessee had more own funds than investments. Therefore, following the decision in HDFC Banks Ltd. (supra) and Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (supra) the disallowance of Rs. 18,05,184/- made by the AO under Rule 8D(2)(ii) is deleted. 11.1 Regarding the disallowance of Rs. 16,17,152/- made by the AO under Rule 8D(2)(iii), we may refer here to the latest decision of the ITAT 'D' Bench, Mumbai in assessee's own case for AY 2012-13 (ITA No. 5606/Mum/2016) which reads as under: "15. As regards the disallowance u/s. 8D(2)(iii), it is noted that earlier the assessee has not pressed this issue and, hence, the addition @ 0.5% of the average value of the investment was confirmed by the ITAT in the earlier year. Now, the ld. Counsel of the assessee has prayed that the assessee needs to be granted relief ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sallowance of Rs. 34,22,236/- made by the AO to the book profit shown by the assessee u/s 115JB of the Act. 17. The 3rd ground of cross objection : On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance made by Assessing Officer of facility usage charges of Rs. 8,93,000/- while computing deduction under section 8IA and thus reducing the Assessee's claim under section 80IA by Rs. 8,93,000/-. 18. During the course of assessment proceedings, the AO found that the assessee had shown "rental income from immovable property" amounting to Rs. 8,93,000/-. The assessee had included the above amount in profit and gains from business while computing deduction u/s 80IA. In response to a query raised by the AO to justify the above claim of including this income for computing deduction u/s 80IA, the assessee filed a reply dated 26.11.2015 which is as under: "As regards Revenue from Operations we submit that Revenue from Sale of Service and Other Operating Revenue are fully derived from CFS activities and therefore are eligible for claim of deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. Further, as regards Other Income we submit that, Mobile Tower Rent R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
