9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 1142X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t charged by one party at a rate of interest @16% compared to 10% by the remaining other parties - HELD THAT:- We note that there is no dispute on the payment of interest. The issue is in respect of rate of interest which has been charged @ 16% vis- -vis 10% by the other parties. We note that the difference in terms and conditions with Carvan Creations Pvt. Ltd. which have been effectively brought on record and considered by the Ld. CIT(A), and also the fact that how this party is a related party within the meaning of sec. 40A(2)(b) for which nothing is brought on record to establish the said relationship. No reason to interfere with the finding given by the Ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, dismiss ground no. 2 taken by the revenue in this respect. Disallowance of depreciation claimed on its speed boat - As per AO rental income from the said boat which is not allowable - HELD THAT:- CIT(A) noted that rental income from boat has to be assessed either as business income or income from other sources. It cannot be assessed as income from house property. Accordingly, depreciation was allowed on the boat even though it had earned rentals for three months - We do agree with the observati ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts and law in allowing the appeal on the issue of disallowance u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act, whereas it is primarily a responsibility of the Assessee to show the source of acquisition of shares by production of material during assessment stage, as decided by the Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Dhanuka Sons vs. CIT Central-l. 2. That on the facts and in circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts as well as law, in deleting the disallowance u/s. 40A(2) of the Income Tax Act since the party M/s. Carvan Creation Pvt. Ltd. charged interest at an exorbitant rate compared to the remaining 17 other body corporate/parties in the case and the assessee had no explanation for the same. 3. That on the facts and in circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in directing to allow depreciation on the rental income of the boat, when no depreciation is allowable if the income is treated as an income from other sources. 4. That on the facts and in circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in facts and law in deleting the addition made on the issue of undisclosed stock on the basis of additional evidences of Joint Venture (JV) a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. in ITA No. 204/2022 C. M. Application No. 31445/2022 which has been followed by the coordinate bench of ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Babul Fiscal Services (P) Ltd v. ACIT in ITA No. 318/Kol/2022 dated 02.08.2022 holding that no disallowance is required to be made in the case of the assessee because it has not earned any tax-free income and allowed the appeal of the assessee by deleting the addition so made. 4.1. Further, the issue relating to assessee having own fund more than the investments made in the investments yielding exempt income has been dealt with in favour of the assessee by the Hon ble jurisdictional High court of Calcutta in the case of REI Agro Ltd. Vs. DCIT in G.A. 3022 of 2013 ITAT 161 of 2013, dt. 23rd December, 2013. Thus, considering the facts on record and the judicial precedents referred above, we do not find any reason to interfere with the finding given by the Ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, ground no. 1 is dismissed. 5. Ground no. 2 relates to disallowance made u/s. 40A(2) of the Act in respect of interest charged by one party M/s. Carvan Creations Pvt. Ltd. at a rate of interest namely ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Ld. CIT(A) noted that rental income from boat has to be assessed either as business income or income from other sources. It cannot be assessed as income from house property. Accordingly, depreciation was allowed on the boat even though it had earned rentals for three months amounting to Rs. 75,000/-. We do agree with the observations and findings of Ld. CIT(A) in allowing the claim of depreciation of Rs.4,84,843/- on the boat and accordingly, dismiss this ground of appeal of the revenue. 7. Ground no. 4 is in respect of deleting the addition made on the issue of undisclosed stock a property which was developed under a Joint Venture Agreement (JV) with Japna Estates. In this respect, assessee had a property at plot no. 3, Model Town, Delhi which was developed having four floors and stilt. The property was constructed under a JV with Japna Estates. The facts of the transaction as submitted by the assessee are as under : a. The assessee bought a Land/Plot admeasuring 300 sq. mtr. at 2.70 crores. b. Incurred Stamp Duty of INR 21 lakhs. c. Total cost of Plot - 2.91 crores. d. Entered into Joint Venture agreement with Japna Estates for construction. e. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
