TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 1087
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....12.07.2008 declaring total income of Rs. 23,45,990/-. Subsequently it revised the return of income on 23.07.2008 showing the total income of Rs. 20,30,058/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was framed u/s. 143(3) vide order dated 23.11.2010 and total income was determined at Rs. 69,80,010/-. Aggrieved by the order of A.O, Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). CIT(A) vide order dated 04.10.2011 granted partial relief to the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order CIT(A), Assessee is now in appeal before us and has raised following grounds:- 1.1 The order passed u/s.250 on 4.10.2011 for A.Y.2008-09 by CIT(A)-XI, Abad upholding the disallowance of gratuity payment of Rs. 3,15,933 and loss on valuation of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ent) and liabilities side (i.e. provision) but no expense was shown in the Profit and Loss account but in the revised return, the claim of expenditure was made. A.O was of the view that the claim of gratuity to be payable and claimed u/s. 40A(7) was not allowable since the amount was not routed through the regular books of accounts and since it did not find place under the expenses. He therefore added the aforesaid sum to the total income of the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of A.O, Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). CIT(A) upheld the order of A.O by holding as under:- 2.2 I have carefully considered the rival submission. I have also gone through assessment order and the submissions made by the A.R. It is seen that the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e expenditure as per clause (i) as mentioned above. However, it is seen that the payment has not been made by the appellant. The payment has come directly from the Life Insurance Corporation of India. Since the payment was not made by the appellant accordingly even the condition as mentioned in para (i) above is also not fulfilled. 5. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A), Assessee is now in appeal before us. 6. Before us, the ld. A.R. submitted that as per the guidelines of RBI, the Staff Gratuity Fund of its employees was maintained through LIC. He submitted that the deduction on account of gratuity was claimed when actual payment of gratuity was made to the concerned employee and not when the amount was paid to LIC. He further submitted....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....views that the claim of loss on account of depreciation of mutual fund was not admissible because the Assessee was showing mutual funds under the head investment and the surplus funds were invested in mutual funds and the mutual funds were having lock in period of 3 years. He was of the view that the loss or gain on the mutual fund would occur only after its redemption, maturity or termination of the scheme. In the present case, the Assessee had neither redeemed the investment nor the schemes have been terminated and therefore the loss on account of investment depreciation was not allowable as deduction. He accordingly disallowed the claim deduction. Aggrieved by the order of A.O, Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A). CIT(A) upheld the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ese securities cannot be made as per the guidelines for valuation of closing stock. This way, the assessee's contention of valuing these securities at NAV for closing stock purposes and the auditor's observations are misplaced and deserved to be rejected summarily. Similarly, the RBI guidelines as submitted by the appellant read as under: "Investments in quoted debt/money market Mutual Fund Units should be valued as per stock exchange quotations. Investments in non-quoted Mutual Funds Units are to be valued on the basis of the latest re-purchase price declared by the Mutual Funds in respect of each particular scheme. In case of funds with a lock-in-period, or where repurchase price/market quote is not available, Units could....