2012 (7) TMI 965 - AT - Income Tax

Tribunal remits expenses disallowance, allows higher depreciation on leased vehicles, deems capital loss non-speculative.

The Tribunal remitted the disallowance of expenses under section 14A back to the Assessing Officer for reevaluation, citing the need for cogent reasons. ... - Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of expenses u/s 14A.2. Disallowance of depreciation on leased vehicles.3. Treatment of capital loss as speculative loss.4. Levy of interest u/s 234B, 234D, and withdrawal of interest u/s 244A.Summary:1. Disallowance of Expenses u/s 14A:The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed Rs. 53,67,000/- u/s 14A, attributing it to expenses incurred for earning exempt income. The CIT(A) deleted this disallowance, referencing earlier ITAT orders. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the AO for fresh examination in light of the Delhi High Court judgment in Maxpo Investment Ltd., which requires the AO to provide cogent reasons for disallowance.2. Disallowance of Depreciation on Leased Vehicles:The AO restricted depreciation on leased vehicles to 20% instead of the claimed 40%, citing lack of evidence from the assessee. The CIT(A) upheld this decision. The Tribunal, referencing the Delhi High Court judgment in CIT v. MGF (285 ITR 142), held that vehicles leased by an NBFC are eligible for 40% depreciation. Thus, the assessee's claim for higher depreciation was allowed.3. Treatment of Capital Loss as Speculative Loss:The AO treated a capital loss of Rs. 29,47,766/- on the sale of bonds as speculative loss u/s 73. The CIT(A) upheld this treatment. The Tribunal found that the loss pertained to government securities, not shares, and thus was not covered by the explanation to section 73. Consequently, the loss was deemed capital in nature, not speculative.4. Levy of Interest u/s 234B, 234D, and Withdrawal of Interest u/s 244A:The Tribunal held that interest u/s 234B and 234D is mandatory and depends on the final outcome of the case. Similarly, the withdrawal of interest u/s 244A will be determined based on the final assessment. These grounds were allowed for statistical purposes.Conclusion:The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee for statistical purposes and remitted specific issues back to the AO for fresh examination. The revenue's appeal was also decided in its favor for statistical purposes.