9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 770X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bunal was satisfied that the assessee has added back the depreciation as per profit and loss account to the loss as per the profit and loss account and thereafter claimed depreciation which is permissible under section 32 - Thus, the tribunal concluded that the action of the AO in disallowing the claim is based on the premise that the assessee has made a double claim which was found to be factually incorrect by the tribunal. Accordingly, the disallowance was directed to be deleted. IICM contribution - CIT-A while considering the said issue held that it was not ascertainable as to how and under what circumstances such big amounts have been debited as IICM contribution in the profit and loss account, and it is not ascertainable as to whether claim of such expenses was incidental to the business activities carried on by the assessee or not as per relevant provisions of section 40 A (9) and therefore the expenditure was not allowable - HELD THAT:- The assessee pointed out that the said observation/findings of the Assessing Officer and CIT-A is factually incorrect and the tax auditor has not reported that the said sum has to be disallowed under section 40 A (9) - Assessing Officer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... idered the factual position in its entirety and granted relief to the assessee wherever admissible and permissible - we are fully satisfied that the case before us is entirely factual and the materials which were available on record were re-examined by the tribunal and relief has been granted to the assessee. The revenue cannot dispute the position of law that the tribunal is the last fact finding authority and this court exercising jurisdiction under section 260 A of the Act is not expected to re-examine the facts and record a different conclusion merely because it may be of the view that different conclusion would be appropriate. Though the expression substantial questions of law is not defined in the Act, the tests laid down by the Constitution Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Sir Chunilal V. Mehta and Sons Ltd. [ 1962 (3) TMI 77 - SUPREME COURT] for determining whether a question raised in a case is a substantial questions of law or not could be applied. On going through the entire facts placed before us, we find that none of the five tests laid down therein stand satisfied in the case on hand. Thus we concluded, that there are no substantial questions of law ari ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal, C Bench, was justified in reversing the finding of CIT (Appeals) in deleting the addition of ₹ 15,00,000/- for the A.Y. 2003-04, ₹ 25,00,000/- for the A.Y. 2004-05 and ₹ 11,58,000/- for the A.Y. 2005-06 respectively on account of Guest House Expenses ? e) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, was justified in reversing the finding of CIT (Appeals) in deleting the addition of ₹ 43,80,000/- for the A.Y. 2003-04, ₹ 47,28,000/- for the A.Y. 2004-05 and ₹ 61,31,000/- for the A.Y. 2005-06 respectively on account of Grant to sports and recreation being non-incidental to the business of the assessee? f) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, C Bench, was justified in reversing the finding of CIT (Appeals) in deleting the addition of ₹ 16,38,000/- for the A.Y. 2003-04, ₹ 67,03,000/- for the A.Y. 2004-05 and ₹ 1,38,23,000/- for the A.Y. 2005-06 respectively on account of Environmental Expenditure ? g) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Le ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ame, the revenue is before us by way of this appeal Mr. S.N. Dutta, Learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the revenue contended that the tribunal was not justified in reversing the findings of the CITA and should have confirmed the disallowance of depreciation which was charged to profit and loss account and added back by the assessee itself in the return of income with cogent reasons as the assessee failed to produce any details before the Assessing Officer and also before the CITA. Further, it is submitted that the tribunal committed an error in reversing the findings of the CITA and the deduction claimed as expenditure for contribution to IICM when the same in question is already hit by the provisions of Section 40 A (9) of the Act. Further it is contended that the tribunal ought not to have deleted the addition in respect of closing stock of coal as the assessee failed to produce any evidence to support their contention that there was no saleable value or realisable value of the said closing stock of coal. Further the Learned Standing Counsel contended that the tribunal ought not to have deleted the addition on account of Guest House Expenses as the assessee had failed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant revenue was justified or whether the respondent assessee are right, we had carefully perused the orders passed by the Assessing Officer, CITA as well as the tribunal. From the order passed by the tribunal we find that the tribunal at the first instance noted the findings recorded by the CITA on all issues, and thereafter proceeded to consider the submissions of the assessee, and the relevant documents which were already available on record and granted relief to the assessee. It may not be necessary for us to deal with all the issues raised as if we are satisfied that the matters are entirely factual, we would refrain from interfering with the order of the tribunal. Only if we are not convinced with the same and we find that substantial questions of law arise for consideration then we have to elaborately discuss each and every issue which have been framed for consideration. 9. The first issue was with regard to the disallowance of depreciation. The CITA confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer on the ground that the assessee failed to furnish any details either before Assessing Officer or before him and failed to produce any reliable and convincing material to rever ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctor in particular. Further they contended that the executives at different levels of Coal India Limited and its subsidiaries including the appellant company are sent to IICM for participating in management and technical development programmes, workshops and seminars conducted with a view to improve their skills and expertise. The assessee further stated that their executives are also sent for intensive training. The IICM raised the bill on Coal India Limited, the holding company, which distributes the total expenditure to all its subsidiaries at ₹ 50 per ton of coal produced and the amount of expenditure so apportioned to the appellant company is accounted on the basis of advice received from Coal India Limited. It was further contended that the amount paid by the assessee company to Coal India Limited is shown under the head Miscellaneous Expenses. The assessee further contended that though these details were furnished to the Assessing Officer and the CITA, however they have stated that there was a note in the tax audit report in Form No. 3CD that contribution to IICM is the sum paid by the assessee as an employer which was not allowable under section 40 A (9). The assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... more, the tribunal pointed out that the technical evaluation based on which the coal mixed with Matti etc. has been valued at NIL by the assessee has not been challenged as incorrect by the revenue authorities. Further it was pointed out that in the event of the coal being mixed with Matti, and any sum realized by the assessee on such sale the same would be offered to tax by the assessee under section 28 of the Act or the same sum brought to tax by the revenue under section 41 (1) of the Act. 12. We have perused the findings recorded by the tribunal on the other issues as well. The tribunal has proceeded to deal with the issues one after another. As noted above while dealing with each of the issue the tribunal has given the gist of the findings of the CITA who concurred with the Assessing Officer thereafter took note of the submissions of the assessee and decided the same for its correctness. While dealing so the tribunal considered the factual position in its entirety and granted relief to the assessee wherever admissible and permissible. Therefore, we are fully satisfied that the case before us is entirely factual and the materials which were available on record were re-examin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
