9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1799X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot apply if no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year. We delete the disallowance made by the AO. Thus the 1st ground of appeal is allowed. Addition of provision for doubtful debts/advances made to the book profit u/s 115JB - HELD THAT:- In Yokogawa India Ltd. [ 2011 (8) TMI 766 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] as held that while computing book profits, provisions made for bad and doubtful debts cannot be added back in accordance with Explanation (c) to section 115JB (1) as same is not an ascertain liability. On the other hand, in the case of Ilpea Paramount Pvt. Ltd. [ 2010 (2) TMI 45 - DELHI HIGH COURT] as held that provision for doubtful debts and provision for doubtful advances are nothing but the pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the AO u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D while computing book profit u/s 115JB. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 7083/MUM/2014 - - - Dated:- 14-12-2017 - SHRI D.T. GARASIA (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) For the Assessee : Mr. R.C. Jain, AR For the Revenue : Mr. Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the assessee. The relevant assessment year is 2011-12. The appeal is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai and arises out of the assessment completed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act 1961, (the Act ). 2. The 1st ground raised by the assessee in this appeal is against the order of the Ld. CIT(A) upholdin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me has been earned or received by it and hence no disallowance u/s 14A be made. However, the Ld. CIT(A) was not convinced with the same and upheld the disallowance made by the AO. 2.3 Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee relies on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd. (2017) 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad), PCIT vs. M/s Reliance Capital Asset Management (ITA No. 487/2015) (Bombay High Court) and Quantum Advisors Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 3418/Mum/2015) (ITAT, Mumbai). 2.4 On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) and the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014. 2.5 We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decisions are given b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shell, the facts are that the assessee-company had suo motu added back the provision for doubtful debts/advances of ₹ 43,67,928/- while computing the books profit u/s 115JB. However, in the revised return of income filed on 28.03.2013, the assessee excluded the book profit u/s 115JB relying on the decision in the case of CIT vs. Yokogawa India Ltd. (2012) 17 taxmann.com 15 (Kar.). The AO was not convinced with the said working of the assessee because as per clause (i) in Explanation (1) to sub-section (2) of section 115JB which was introduced with retrospectively effect from 01.04.2011, if any provision for diminution in the value of any asset has been debited to the profit and loss account, it is to be added to the net profit as s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hence the same are to be added back in computing book profit in view of the retrospective amendment introduced in section 115JA by inserting clause (g) in Explanation to section 115JA (2) which specifically mentions the amount set aside as provision for diminution in the value of any asset. Also in the case of CIT vs. Steriplate (P) Ltd. (2011) 338 ITR 547 (P H), the Hon ble Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that by virtue of clause (i) of Explanation 1 to sub-section (2) of section 115JB, as inserted by the Finance (2) Act, 2009, retrospectively from 1st April 2001, any amount set aside as provision for diminution in the value of any asset would not reduce the book profits of an assessee for the assessment year 2002-03. 3.4.1 W ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
