9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 322X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and total loss of the assessee was assessed at Rs. - 11,49,38,164/- after making various additions by the Assessing Officer. The assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) against the disallowance and additions made by the Assessing Officer. The ld. CIT(A) has partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. Further facts of the case are discussed while adjudicating the grounds of appeals filed by revenue as under. ITA No. 2107/Ahd/2015 A.Y. 2009-10 filed by revenue & C.O. 159/Ahd/2015 filed A.Y. 2009-10 filed by assessee Ground No. 1(Disallowance deleted by CIT(A) u/s. 14A of Rs. 20,381/- & Ground No. 1 of C.O. (Disallowance confirmed by CIT(A) u/s. 14A of Rs. 2,58,478/-)) 3. During the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer noticed that assessee earned dividend income to the amount of Rs. 1,92,663/-. The Assessing Officer further noticed that assessee has earned dividend income from the investment of Rs. 36,24,000/- made in the equity shares of M/s Atul Limited. On query, the assessee explained that it had not made any new investment in the years under consideration and investment was made from its own funds. It was also submitted that no administration expenditure should be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd any merit in the appeal of the revenue, therefore, the same stands dismissed. Ground No. 3 (Disallowance deleted by CIT(A) u/s. 40(a)(ia) of Rs. 41,87,539/-) filed by revenue & Ground No. 2 of C.O. (Disallowance confirmed by CIT(A) of Rs. 4,05,359/-) 8. During the course of assessment on verification of the detail filed the Assessing Officer observed that assessee company has not deducted tax at source under the head freight charges and port/terminal handling charges by claiming the same as reimbursement of expenses. On query, the assessee explained that all these payments made to six parties mentioned at page no. 9 of the assessment order were in the nature of reimbursement of expenses therefore provision of deduction of tax at source was not applicable to reimbursement of actual expenditure. The Assessing Officer has not accepted the explanation of the assessee. He was of the view that the payment made by the assessee was in the nature of fees for technical services as per provisions of Article 7 of DTAA and deemed to accrue in that contracting state when the payer is the resident of that contracting state. Therefore, payment of Rs. 22,33,260/- made to the non-residents was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icer has computed interest @ 12% on the amount of advance given to the sister concern and added Rs. 1.56 crores u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act to the total income of the assessee company. 12. The assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee. 13. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record. The Assessing Officer has made addition of Rs. 1.56 crores after computing interest @ 12% on interest free loan of Rs. 13 crores advanced to its sister concern M/s. Lalbhai Realty Finance Ltd. The ld. CIT(A) has deleted the disallowance after verification of undisputed fact that assessee was having sufficient interest free funds to the amount of Rs. 75.25 crores in the form of share capital and reserves and surplus. The revenue had not disproved these undisputed fact that assessee was having sufficient interest free fund out of which the impugned loan was advanced to its sister concern. In the light of the above facts and findings, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of ld. CIT(A), therefore, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed. ITA No. 2107/Ahd/2015 filed by revenue Ground No. 5 (Carry forward LTC loss of Rs. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1 filed by assessee 20. As the facts and issues involved in grounds of appeal vide ITA No. 2107/Ahd/2015 Assessment Year 2009-10 are similar as in ITA No. 2708/Ahd/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 therefore after applying the decision adjudicated vide ITA No. 2107/Ahd/2015 as supra in this order, this appeal of the revenue is disallowed. 21. The ground no. 1 of cross objection of the assessee regarding disallowance confirmed by CIT(A) u/s 14A of Rs. 11,77,806/- is partly allowed by restricting the disallowance u/s. 14A up to the exempt income in the form of dividend of Rs. 1,92,663/- earned during the year under consideration. The ground no. 2 of cross objection is not pressed therefore the same stands dismissed. Ground no. 3 of the cross objection pertained to not granting credit for TDS amounting to Rs. 2,55,328/- 22. Heard both the sides and perused the material on record connected with the issue filed by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings and appellate proceedings. Since this issue of granting credit for TDS has not been specifically adjudicated by the lower authority, therefore, we restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding afres ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
