Appeal partly allowed, Transfer Pricing & Section 14A issues academic, deductions granted, penalty dismissed.

The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes. The Transfer Pricing Adjustment issues were deemed academic. The Disallowance of Expenses under Section 14A was partially upheld, remitted back to the AO. The Claim of Deduction under Section 35(2AB) was allowed. The Disallowance of Additional Depreciation was overturned in favor of the assessee. Penalty Proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were dismissed as premature. The Tribunal's order was pronounced on November 22, 2019.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment
2. Disallowance of Expenses under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
3. Claim of Deduction under Section 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
4. Disallowance of Additional Depreciation
5. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961

Detailed Analysis:

1. Transfer Pricing Adjustment
The assessee's grounds of appeal numbered 1 to 5 pertained to transfer pricing adjustments. The assessee's representative submitted that, following the directions of the Dispute Resolution Panel (DRP), no transfer pricing adjustment was necessary. Consequently, these grounds were deemed academic in nature and were not further adjudicated.

2. Disallowance of Expenses under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961
The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed expenses under Section 14A, calculating the disallowance under Rule 8D at 0.5% of the average value of investments, amounting to Rs. 84,79,657. The assessee had already disallowed Rs. 33,52,000, leaving an additional disallowance of Rs. 51,27,657. The Tribunal referred to its previous decisions in the assessee's own cases for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12, where similar issues were adjudicated. The Tribunal remitted the issue back to the AO to adjudicate in line with its earlier orders, allowing the ground for statistical purposes.

3. Claim of Deduction under Section 35(2AB) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
The AO disallowed a proportionate weighted deduction claimed under Section 35(2AB), amounting to Rs. 9.34 Crore. The assessee's representative argued that this issue was covered by previous Tribunal decisions in the assessee's favor for the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The Tribunal agreed, noting that the facts and circumstances were identical to those in the earlier years, and directed the AO to allow the weighted deduction, thereby allowing this ground of appeal.

4. Disallowance of Additional Depreciation
The AO disallowed additional depreciation claimed by the assessee, arguing that the legislative amendment to Section 32 was substantive and applicable from AY 2016-17 onwards. The assessee cited the Bombay High Court's decision in the case of M/s. Godrej Industries Ltd., which supported the claim for additional depreciation in subsequent years if the asset was used for less than 180 days in the initial year. The Tribunal, referencing this judgment and similar decisions from the Karnataka and Madras High Courts, concluded that the assessee was entitled to claim the balance depreciation in the subsequent year. Thus, this ground was allowed.

5. Initiation of Penalty Proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961
The issue of penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) was deemed premature and was dismissed accordingly.

Conclusion:
The appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, with specific directions for the AO to re-adjudicate certain issues in line with previous Tribunal decisions and judicial pronouncements. The Tribunal's order was pronounced on November 22, 2019.

---