TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (7) TMI 1518
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... both the parties, we proceed to hear both the appeals together and pass a consolidated order for the sake of brevity. 3. First we shall take up ITA No.1152/Kol/2017 by the assessee for Assessment Year 2009-10. 4. The only issue is to be decided is as to whether the CIT(A) is justified in confirming the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of leave encashment in the facts and circumstances of the case. 5. Heard both parties and perused the materials available on record. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. vs. Union of India granted stay against the decision of Hon'ble High Court of Calcutta in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. reported in 292 ITR 470(Cal) until further orders vide order dated 08....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....oth parties and persued the materials available on record. It is noted that a similar issue on same identical facts has been disposed off by this Tribunal in assessee's own case vide consolidated order dated 04.03.2016 for Assessment Years 2005-06 to 2008-09 in favour of the assessee in granting deduction u/s 80IA of the Act. For ready reference, the relevant portion of the order at Page No.159 of Paper Book is reproduced hereinbelow: "5. We have heard the arguments of both the sides and also perused the relevant material available on record. As agreed by the ld. representatives of both the sides, this issue involved in Ground No. 1 & 2 of the Revenue's appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee, inter alia, by the decision of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e involved in Grounds No. 3 & 4 of the revenue's appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee, inter alia, by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for A.Ys. 2003-04 and 2004-05 rendered vide its order dated 23.10.2009 (supra), wherein the similar amount of incentive received by the assessee-company under the same scheme of West Bengal Government has been held to be capital in nature not chargeable to tax. Respectfully following the said decision of the Tribunal, we uphold the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) giving relief to the assessee on this issue and dismiss Grounds No. 3 & 4 of the Revenue's appeal." 13. In view of the above discussion and further thereto, it is noted that this T....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... income, during the relevant previous year for the purpose of disallowing any expenditure incurred in relation to the said income. In other words, Section 14A will not apply if no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held as under: 21. There is merit in the contention of Mr. Vohra that the decision of the Supreme Court in Rajendra Prasad Moddy (supra) was rendered in the context of allowability of deduction under Section 57(iii) of the Act, where the expression used is 'for the purpose of making or earning such income'. Section 14A of the Act on the other hand contains the expression 'in relation to income which does not form part of the total income.' The decision ....