9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (9) TMI 1658X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the decisions of the Co-ordinate Benches in earlier assessment years in assessee's own case from AY 2010-11 to 2015-16. Accordingly we set aside the DRP direction on this issue and direct the AO/TPO to delete the adjustment made and consequently ground no. 3 is allowed. Disallowance made in respect of rental paid in respect of motor cars by treating the same as capital expenditure - HELD THAT:- We have perused the facts of the case in the light of the decisions of Coordinate Benches from AY 2009-10 to 2015-16 in assessee's own case and find that the issue is recurring one which has been decided in favour of the assessee. Disallowance of depreciation on moulds - HELD THAT:- As following the orders of Coordinate Benches from A.Y. 2011-12 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 1 is general in nature and does not require any adjudication. 3. Issue raised in ground no. 2 is against the direction of DRP on determination of arms' length price in respect thereof for intra group services received by the appellant assessee. 4. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee at the outset submitted that the issue is recurring one right from A.Y. 2009-10 to 2015-16 and is covered in favour of the assessee by the decisions of the Co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal deciding the issue in favour of the assessee in all the assessment years. The Ld. A.R took the Bench through the decisions attached in the Paper book and prayed that the ground may be allowed following the said decisions of the Co-ordinate Bench in the assessee's own case. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... which is placed at page 6624 to 6631 of the PB allowing the relief to the assessee. The ground raised by the assessee becomes redundant and is dismissed. Ground no. 4 is dismissed. 11. Issue raised in ground no. 5 is general in nature and need no adjudication. 12. Issue raised in ground no. 6 , the assessee has assailed the DRP direction upholding the disallowance made by the AO is in respect of rental paid in respect of motor cars by treating the same as capital expenditure. 13. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that DRP in Para 9 of page 16 & 17 of its direction has followed the direction given by DRP in AY 2012-13 and AY 2013-14. The Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that DRP has also directed the AO to find out whether an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ts in brief are that the assessee has not received any dividend income and accordingly no disallowance was made in terms of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. reported in [2018] 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC). The AO however applied Rule 8D and disallowance was made which was affirmed by the DRP. 19. In our considered opinion the issue is settled one that no disallowance can be made where there is no exempt income as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the above decision. We, therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court set aside the order of DRP on this issue and direct the AO to delete the disallowance. The ground No. 8 is accordingly allowed. 19. Issue raised in ground ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
