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 rules in favor of Assessee, dismisses Revenue's appeals</h1> <h3>Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Versus M/s. T.M. International Logistic Ltd. (Vice-Versa)</h3> Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Versus M/s. T.M. International Logistic Ltd. (Vice-Versa) - TMI Issues Involved:1. Deduction under Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act.2. Disallowance of repairs and maintenance expenses.3. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act.4. Disallowance of telephone expenses.5. Disallowance of payment to non-executive directors.6. Validity of assessment orders.7. Disallowance of club membership expenses.Detailed Analysis:1. Deduction under Section 80-IA of the Income Tax Act:The Assessee claimed deductions under Section 80-IA for Berth No. 12 at Haldia Dock Complex, which was allowed by the CIT(A) based on previous rulings. The Revenue's appeal against this was dismissed as the Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, citing the rule of consistency and previous Tribunal decisions confirming the Assessee's eligibility for such deductions.2. Disallowance of Repairs and Maintenance Expenses:The Assessee incurred expenses for repairs and maintenance at various units, including those not eligible for Section 80-IA deductions. The CIT(A) allowed these expenses, referencing previous years' decisions where such disallowances were deleted. The Tribunal upheld this, emphasizing the need for consistency in treatment across different assessment years.3. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act:The CIT(A) restricted the disallowance under Section 14A to 1% of the dividend income, as Rule 8D was not applicable prior to AY 2008-09. The Tribunal upheld this decision, following consistent rulings from other cases and emphasizing the non-applicability of Rule 8D for the relevant assessment years.4. Disallowance of Telephone Expenses:The AO disallowed 5% of telephone expenses, suspecting non-business use. The CIT(A) deleted this disallowance, and the Tribunal upheld this decision, referencing judicial precedents that corporate entities cannot have personal expenses and noting the absence of any departmental appeal against similar deletions in other years.5. Disallowance of Payment to Non-Executive Directors:The AO disallowed payments to non-executive directors due to lack of details. The CIT(A) allowed these payments, referencing previous years' decisions. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, citing the need for consistency and the absence of any new facts warranting a different conclusion.6. Validity of Assessment Orders:The Assessee contended that the assessment orders were barred by limitation. The Tribunal dismissed this claim, noting that the orders were passed within the statutory time limits specified under Section 153 of the Act.7. Disallowance of Club Membership Expenses:The AO disallowed various club-related expenses. The CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance of membership fees but allowed other club-related expenses. The Tribunal upheld the disallowance of membership fees but allowed expenses related to club services and entrance fees, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in CIT Vs. United Glass Manufacturing Co. Ltd.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals and partially allowed the Assessee's cross-objections, maintaining consistency with previous rulings and judicial precedents. The order was pronounced in open court on 04.10.2016.
TaxTMI 