9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 1103X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd OGX do not fall under the negative list contained in the Thirteenth Schedule, and therefore, the appellant is entitled to deduction under section 80IC of the Act. Therefore, maintaining judicial discipline and respectfully following the decision of ld. CIT (A), the appeal on this ground is allowed. Decided in favour of assessee. Nature of expenses - disallowance of royalty expenditure holding the same to be capital in nature as covered within the meaning of intangible asset u/s 32(1)(ii) of the Act, after allowing depreciation @ 25% thereon - CIT (A) deleted the disallowance following the orders passed by the Tribunal in assessee s own case in earlier years - HELD THAT:- As this issue is squarely covered by the following decisions ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kumar, Sr. DR. ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : These appeals by the Revenue and cross objections by the assessee are directed against the respective orders of the ld. CIT (Appeals) for the assessment years 2013-14 2014-15. 2. Since the issues are common and connected and the appeals and cross objections were heard together, these are being disposed off by this common order. REVENUE S APPEALS : 3. Apropos disallowance under section 80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act ) : The assessee had, during the relevant year, claimed deduction under section 80IC of the Act of Rs.2,01,79,454/- being 30% of profits of Rs.6,72,64,845/- derived from the eligible business i.e. Parwanoo unit. The s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pos issue of disallowance of royalty expenditure holding the same to be capital in nature : The Assessing Officer disallowed expenditure of Rs.1,50,31,500/- out of total expenditure of Rs.2,00,42,000/- holding the royalty payment to be capital in nature and covered within the meaning of intangible asset u/s 32(1)(ii) of the Act, after allowing depreciation @ 25% thereon. Ld. CIT (A) deleted the disallowance following the orders passed by the Tribunal in assessee s own case in earlier years. We may gainfully refer to the concluding portion of ld. CIT (A) s order as under :- In the present case, the appellant has submitted that in appellant's own case for assessment year 2004-05, the Hon'ble Tribunal has allowed royalty fee paid ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der section 115-O of the Act @ 10% in terms of Article 10 of the Double Taxation Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) between India and Germany : On this issue, we note that this issue has been raised for the first time before the ITAT by way of cross objections. Ld. Counsel of the assessee, at the outset, admitted that this issue has been decided by the Special Bench of the ITAT (Mumbai) in the case of DCIT vs. Total Oil India Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 149 taxmann.com 332 wherein it has been held that the beneficial rate for taxation of dividend under application DTAAs is not applicable on the DDT paid on dividends inasmuch as DDT is an additional income tax in the hands of the company and not the shareholder i.e. DDT is a tax liability of the company on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
