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>Tribunal partially allows appeals on expense disallowances, based on precedents and legal interpretations.</h1> <h3>M/s. Indian Rayon & Industries Ltd., (Now known as M/s. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd.), Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward 3(2),</h3> M/s. Indian Rayon & Industries Ltd., (Now known as M/s. Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd.), Versus The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward 3(2), - TMI Issues Involved:1. Disallowance of expenses under Section 6D.2. Disallowance of guest house expenses under Section 37(4).3. Disallowance of entertainment expenses under Section 37(2).4. Disallowance of sales and press conference expenses.5. Disallowance of rural development expenditure.6. Premium on redemption of Nonconvertible debentures.7. Disallowance of club expenses.8. Interest receivable under Section 244A.9. Depreciation on Roll over charges.10. Expenditure on payments made to schools.11. Disallowance under Section 40A(3).12. Sales tax exemption benefit.13. Valuation of closing stock with Modvat.14. Disallowance of interest for the period prior to commencement of business.Detailed Analysis:1. Disallowance of Expenses under Section 6D:The assessee's claim of Rs. 1,75,308/- was disallowed by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A). The Tribunal found that the issue was previously decided against the assessee in earlier years and upheld the CIT(A)'s order.2. Disallowance of Guest House Expenses under Section 37(4):The assessee's claim of Rs. 24,83,326/- was disallowed. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, following the Supreme Court's decision in Britania Industries Ltd., 278 ITR 546 (SC).3. Disallowance of Entertainment Expenses under Section 37(2):The AO disallowed Rs. 38,97,110/- under Section 37(2). The CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to 25%, which was upheld by the Tribunal, following its decision in earlier years.4. Disallowance of Sales and Press Conference Expenses:The CIT(A) disallowed Rs. 13,70,572/-, but the Tribunal allowed the expenditure, following its own decision in earlier years.5. Disallowance of Rural Development Expenditure:The AO disallowed Rs. 5,07,261/-. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance, but the Tribunal allowed the claim, following its decision in earlier years.6. Premium on Redemption of Nonconvertible Debentures:The Tribunal found the ground infructuous as the claim had been accepted in earlier years.7. Disallowance of Club Expenses:The AO disallowed Rs. 24,050/-, but the CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, and the Tribunal upheld this decision, following its earlier rulings.8. Interest Receivable under Section 244A:The AO rejected the assessee's claim for deduction of Rs. 1,40,02,326/-. The CIT(A) upheld this, but the Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's ground, following the Special Bench's decision in Avada Trading Co. Vs ACIT.9. Depreciation on Roll Over Charges:The AO rejected the claim, and the CIT(A) upheld this. The Tribunal found the ground infructuous as the amount was allowed as revenue expenditure in earlier years.10. Expenditure on Payments Made to Schools:The AO disallowed Rs. 21,59,851/-, and the CIT(A) upheld this. The Tribunal allowed the claim, following its earlier decisions.11. Disallowance under Section 40A(3):The AO disallowed Rs. 28,140/-. The Tribunal partly allowed the ground, directing the AO to restrict the disallowance to 20% of Rs. 24,000/-.12. Sales Tax Exemption Benefit:The Tribunal admitted the additional ground regarding the sales tax exemption benefit of Rs. 2,42,58,647/- and restored the issue to the AO for fresh examination.13. Valuation of Closing Stock with Modvat:The AO added Rs. 99,87,962/- for undervaluation of closing stock. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, and the Tribunal upheld this, following the Supreme Court's decision in CIT Vs Indio Nippon Chemicals.14. Disallowance of Interest for the Period Prior to Commencement of Business:The AO disallowed Rs. 6,65,28,237/-, but the CIT(A) allowed the claim. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, following its earlier rulings and the Supreme Court's decision in DCIT Vs Core Health Care Ltd.Conclusion:The appeals filed by the assessee and the revenue were partly allowed, and the cross objections filed by the assessee were dismissed. The Tribunal's decisions were largely based on precedents set in earlier years and higher court rulings.
TaxTMI 