TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tax Appeals Partly Allowed with Issues Remanded for Reconsideration</h1> <h3>Gujarat State Financial Services Ltd. Versus The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmadabad,</h3> Gujarat State Financial Services Ltd. Versus The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Ahmadabad, - TMI Issues Involved:1. Provision for Diminution in Value of Investment2. Disallowance u/s 14A for Interest on Borrowings and Administrative Expenses3. Disallowance of Bad Debts Written Off4. Depreciation on Vehicles Given on Lease5. Interest Charged u/s 234B, 234C, and 234DSummary:1. Provision for Diminution in Value of Investment:For A.Y. 05-06, the assessee's ground regarding the provision for diminution in value of investment of Rs. 16,77,234/- was not pressed as the CIT(A) had rectified his order. For A.Y. 06-07, the issue of Rs. 47,95,000/- was set aside to the A.O. for verification, directing the A.O. to give a reasonable opportunity of being heard and allow the claim as per law.2. Disallowance u/s 14A for Interest on Borrowings and Administrative Expenses:For both A.Y. 05-06 and 06-07, the disallowance u/s 14A was contested. The A.O. had disallowed Rs. 4.47 crores and Rs. 5.22 crores respectively. The CIT(A) partly confirmed the addition, directing the A.O. to work out the interest on the excess investment over own funds. The Tribunal set aside the issue to the A.O. to follow the decision in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 01-02, allowing the appeal for statistical purposes. For administrative expenses, the Tribunal followed its earlier decision, disallowing 1% of the total claim, and set aside the issue to the A.O. for both assessment years.3. Disallowance of Bad Debts Written Off:For A.Y. 05-06, the A.O. disallowed Rs. 13,50,40,960/- as the assessee had not proved the debt became bad and did not fulfill the conditions u/s 36(2). The CIT(A) confirmed the addition. The Tribunal, following the Supreme Court decision in T.R.F. Ltd. vs. CIT, allowed the bad debts to the extent of Rs. 13,22,18,530/-, excluding the amount recovered in subsequent years. For A.Y. 06-07, the A.O. was directed to exclude Rs. 28,22,430/- from the income.4. Depreciation on Vehicles Given on Lease:For A.Y. 05-06 and 06-07, the A.O. disallowed higher depreciation on vehicles given on lease. The CIT(A) confirmed the addition, relying on the Bombay High Court decision in Kotak Mahindra Finance Ltd. vs. DCIT. The Tribunal, following its earlier decisions in the assessee's own case, allowed the appeal in favor of the assessee, dismissing the revenue's appeal.5. Interest Charged u/s 234B, 234C, and 234D:For both assessment years, the issue of charging interest u/s 234B, 234C, and 234D was deemed consequential. The A.O. was directed to take a decision as per law.Conclusion:The appeals for both assessment years were partly allowed, with several issues set aside to the A.O. for reconsideration and verification in line with earlier Tribunal decisions and legal precedents.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
