TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (5) TMI 1322
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... condoning the delay. Hence we condone the delay and admit the revenue's appeal for hearing. 3. The only issue to be decided in this appeal of revenue is that with regard to the allowance of leave encashment of Rs. 1,47,66,197/-. 4. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We find that the Ld. CIT(A) had allowed the claim of the assessee in respect of provision made for leave encashment by placing reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. reported in Vs. Union of India (2007) 292 ITR 470 (Cal) but Ld. Sr. DR before us argued that subsequently Hon'ble Supreme Court has stayed this judgment of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court vide order dated 08-05-2009 by following observations:- "Pending hearing and final disposal of the Civil Appeals, Department is restrained from recovering penalty and interest which has accrued till date. It is made clear that as far as the outstanding interest demand as of date is concerned, it would be open to the Department to recover that amount in case Civil Appeal of the Department is allowed. We further make it clear that the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for AY 2006-07 reported in (2015) 154 ITD 426 (Kolkata), which in turn placed reliance on the decision of Birla Corporation Ltd., supra. The decisions cited by Ld. AR were fairly conceded by the ld. DR. We find that the issue involved is squarely covered by the decision of Coordinate bench by this Tribunal in assessee's own case reported in (2015) 154 ITD 426 (Kolkata), wherein it was held as under: "The issue on proposition of law regarding allowance of remaining additional depreciation in the next assessment year u/s. 32(1)(iia) of the Act was covered in favour of assessee and against revenue by the decision of coordinate bench of ITAT Kolkata 'A' Bench in the case of Birla Corporation Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 683/Kol/2011 for the assessment year 2007-08 dated 8-12-2014, wherein it was held that extra depreciation allowable u/s. 32(1)(iia) is an extra incentive which has been earned and calculated in the year of acquisition but restricted for that year to 50% on account of usage. The so earned incentive must be made available in the subsequent year. The overall deduction of depreciation u/s. 32 shall d....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 20.05 442.58 20.05 440.26 28.64 532.84 28.64 500.14 28.64 462.72 23.25 240.11 Total : 463.11 462.63 460.31 561.48 528.78 491.36 263.36 Long term investment Kesoram Industries Ltd. Kesoram Insurance Management Ltd. Bharuch Enviro Infrastructure Ltd. Vasavadatta Services Pvt. Ltd. MMA CETP Coop. Society Ltd. 3.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.12 3.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.12 3.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.12 3.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.12 3.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0 3.04 0.01 0.01 0 0 3.04 0 0 0 0 Total 3.19 3.19 3.19 3.19 3.07 3.06 3.04 Number of times share capital is more than investment 145 145 144 176 172 161 87 It was argued from the aforesaid table that the borrowed funds were utilized only for the purpose of regular business of the assessee and no part of the borrowed funds were utilized ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ITAT No. 157 of 2013 dated 8.1.2014 rendered by Calcutta High Court "While rejecting the claim of the assessee with regard to expenditure or no expenditure, as the case may be, in relation to exempted income, the AO has to indicate cogent reasons for the same. From the facts of the present case, it is noticed that the AO has not considered the claim of the assessee and straight away embarked upon computing disallowance under Rule 8D of the Rules on presuming the average value of investment at ½% of the total value. In view of the above and respectfully following the coordinate bench decision in the case of J.K. Investors (Bombay) Ltd., supra, we uphold the order of CIT (A)". CIT vs R.E.I. Agro Ltd in GA 3022 of 2013 in ITAT 161 of 2013 dated 23.12.2013 rendered by Calcutta High Court "The Assessing Officer also disallowed the expenditure under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without first recording that he was not ITA Nos..1146, 1138/Kol/2012-CAM Integrated Coal Mining Ltd 9 satisfied with the correctness of the claim as regards the claim that "no expenditure" was made by the assessee. Challenging the order of the tribunal, the present appeal has....