TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2013 (2) TMI 321
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....missioner of Income Tax (A) has erred in allowing the claim of Rs. 8,14,368/- as deduction under section 35(1)(iv) r.w.s. 35(2) of the Income Tax Act on scientific research, ignoring the findings of the Assessing Officer that no research work was carried out by the assessee. 3. At the threshold, we note that tax effect in this case is less than Rs. 3 lacs fixed by the CBDT for filing appeal before the tribunal. As per Instruction No. 3/2011 (F.No. 279/Misc./142/2007-ITJ) dated 09.02.2011 issued by the CBDT, the tax effect for filing appeal before the Appellate Tribunal should be more than Rs. 3 lakhs. The aforesaid instructions have been held to be applicable to all pending appeals by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the decisions in the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....owances can be made by the Assessing Officer and d.) The claim of the entire expenditure taxed as FBT cannot be taxed again by making the disallowance. The disallowance therefore needs to be struck down. ii) The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has grossly erred in not considering the subsidy received during the year of Rs.75,000/- from the sate government against the purchase of generator in F.Y. 1996-97 as capital receipt and has further erred in directing the same to be reduced from the cost of specified asset to allow the depreciation, ignoring the judgmenet of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in C.I.T. vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. (1994) 121 CTR (SC) 201. The subsidy received is....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....00/- out of 7,17,282/- 60,000/- 10,000/- 4. Vehicle maintenance 1,20,000/- out of 12,17,738/- 1,00,000/- 20,000/- 6.1 Considering the above finding of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A), Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) in the present assessment year restricted the disallowances as under:- S.No. Nature of expenditure Amount disallowed Disallowance confirmed Relief 1. Gifts and rewards 34,556/- Nil 34,556/- 2. Telephone expenses 80,000/- out of 8,63,691/- 20,000/- 60,000/- 3. Travelling expenses 1,00,000/- 20,000/- 80,000/- 4. Vehicle maintenance 1,20,000/- 20,000/- 1,00,000/- 7. Against the above additions, assessee has filed cross ob....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....is of the application made on 30.7.1996 but the same has been received during the year. The subsidy has been granted by the State Government on the purchase of the generator set. The documents of the claim made and the relevant correspondence are enclosed. B. The receipt of subsidy from the state govt. has been claimed to be non-taxable and the same is not to be deducted from the cost of the assets to determine the 'actual cost' for the purposes of calculating the depreciation. In this regard we place reliance on the SC order in the case of C.I.T. vs. P.J. Chemicals Ltd. (1994) 121 CTR (SC) 201. Copy of the Supreme Court order is enclosed. The Supreme Court has held. "The e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aid subsidy as taxable income. Assessing Officer further noted that assessee has received a sum of Rs. 75,000/- on account of subsidy received towards 62.5 kva generator set. Assessing Officer further held that if the assessee by relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is not reducing the cost of the generator set, it is duty bound to account for this receipt either income u/s. 41 or under the residuary head income from other sources in accordance the provision of section 56 of the I.T. Act. The Assessing Officer concluded that since the assessee has failed to offer this income therefore, the subsidy of Rs. 75000/-, was hereby added to the income of the assessee. 10. Upon assessee's appeal Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A) ....