TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1798X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hence, do not find any merit in the submission of the Revenue. The appeal grounds of the Revenue are dismissed. MACT provisions to the loss - HELD THAT:- It is clear that the facts and circumstances associated with this is issue neither brought out by the AO nor by the CIT(A). In the facts and circumstances, we deem it fit to remit this issue back to the AO for a fresh examination. The assessee shall lay relevant materials in support of its contention before the AO and comply with the requirements of the AO in accordance with law. AO is free to conduct appropriate enquiry as deemed fit, but he shall furnish adequate opportunity to the assesssee on the material etc to be used against it and decide the matter in accordance with law. - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oration. So far the Government has not quantified any penal part for the same and relied on the Supreme Court decision in the case of Swadeshi Cotton Mills Co., vs CIT 233 ITR 199 wherein it was held that the authority under the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ) irrespective of the nomenclature given to the imposts in the statue whether termed penalty or damages or otherwise, has to find out whether it is compensatory or penal in nature in order to allow compensatory part as deduction under section 37(1) of the Act. The Court further held that the amount of damages for the delayed payment of contribution under section 14B of the Employee s Provident Fund Act, comprises both the element of penal levy as well as compensatory payment and t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 14B of the Employees Provident Funds and Miscellaneous provisions Act for the delayed payment of contribution of provident fund is deductible in computing the income the business of the assessee. The Supreme Court in the case of Swedeshi Cotton Mills Co. Ltd. Vs.CIT (1998) 233 ITR 199 (SC) has held that the authority under the Incometax Act, irrespective of the nomenclature given to the imposts in the statute whether termed as penalty or damages or otherwise has to find out whether it is compensatory or in penal in nature, in order to allow the compensatory part as deduction under Section 37(1) of the Incometax Act. The Court further held that the amount of damages for the delayed payment of contribution under Section 14B of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the reply furnished, the assessee s claim of damages for remittance if Pension fund trust for ₹ 2,35,91,384/ is allowed. furnishing a copy of interest rate declared by Pension Fund accumulation since 1952 to 2014, the AR submitted that since the AO has already decided the nature of this payment ie., the damages paid by it in assessment year 2011-12, is compensatory in nature, this appeal may be allowed. 7. We heard the rival submissions and find merit in the submissions made by the ld. AR, supra, and hence, do not find any merit in the submission of the Revenue. The appeal grounds of the Revenue are dismissed. ITA No. 484/Chny/2018: 8. While making the assessment for assessment year 2007-08, the Assessing Officer adde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... more particularly, when the CIT(A) co-terminates with the powers of the Assessing officer. (vi) The learned CIT(A) ought to have considered the remand report of the Assessing officer while deciding the assessee s claim which he failed to do so. (vii) For the above reasons, it is prayed that the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) be cancelled and the order of the Assessing officer be restored. The Ld. DR presented the case on the lines of grounds of appeal. Per contra, the Ld. AR took us to the copies of relevant portion in the paper book. 10. We heard the rival submissions. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) is extracted as under: 6. I have perused the Assessment Order the submissions made by the assessee. The appell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|