TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 117
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....011-12 against the order of the learned CIT (Appeals)-22, New Delhi, on 4.11.2015. The assessee has raised effectively the 5 grounds of appeal as under:- ITA No.380/Del/2016 1. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in not allowing complete relief of disallowance of Rs. 5,24,350/- made by Assessing Officer u/s 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961 while computing total income, ignoring the fact that no expenses have been incurred for earning dividend income on the basis of surmises and conjecture. 2. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in not allowing complete relief of disallowance of Rs. 5,24,350/- made by Assessing Officer u/s 14A of Income Tax Act while calculating the book profit u/s 115JB, ignoring the fact that no expenses have been incurred for earning dividend income on the basis of surmises and conjecture. 3. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 47,53,000/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of Corporate Social Responsibility ignoring the facts and circumstances of the case. 4. The Ld. CIT (Appeals) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 2,217/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of prior period expenses ignoring the facts and circums....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mal computation provisions and disclosed a book profit of Rs. 8,99,28,17,953/- under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). The learned Assessing Officer passed an assessment order under Section 143(3) of the Act on 11.03.2014 computing the normal income at a loss of Rs. 13,64,43,99,192/- and also computed the book profit at Rs. 8,99,36,02,727/-. As the book profit tax was higher it was assessed at that. In the normal computation of income the main meaning several additions and disallowances. In the book profit also the AO disallowed Rs. 5,24,350/- under Section 14A and provision for leave travel assistance of Rs. 2,60,424/-. The assessee challenged the order before the ld. CIT (Appeals) who partly allowed the appeal of the assessee and, therefore, both the parties are in appeal before us. 4. We first take up the appeal of the assessee in ITA No. 380/Del/2016. The first ground of appeal is against the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act. The assessee has shown exempt income of Rs. 10,20,000/- and, therefore, the learned Assessing Officer asked the assessee explanation why disallowance under Rule 8D r.w.s. 14A shall not be made. The assessee submitted that no e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the disallowance of Rs. 47,53,000/- on account of coordinate social responsibility. The assessee has claimed the above expenditure stating that Rs. 24.96 lakhs and Rs. 22.57 lakhs are incurred towards passenger amenities improvement at Bahadur Garh Railway Station and solar lighting at that railway station respectively. The learned Assessing Officer stated that the above expenditure is not wholly and exclusively incurred for the business purposes of the assessee and hence disallowed. The learned CIT (Appeals) also confirmed the same. 7.1 The learned Authorized Representative submitted that the above issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee in 157 I.T.D. 601. Even otherwise he submitted that the assessee is in the business of leasing the rolling stock to the Indian Railways and Indian Railways is the only customer and, therefore, the above expenditure has direct nexus with the business of the assessee. It was, therefore, submitted that these expenditure should wholly and exclusively incurred for the purposes of the business. 8. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and perused the orders of the lower authorities. The assessee has incurred the above expenditu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rmed the similar addition. 10.1 The learned Authorized Representative submitted that the above issue is squarely covered against the assessee vide para No. 16 of the order of the co-ordinate bench wherein an identical addition was confirmed. The learned Departmental Representative also confirmed the same. 10.2 We have carefully considered that vide para No. 16 in ITA. No. 3992/Del/2014 for assessment year 2010-11 and C.O. No. 100/Del/2015 vide order dated 12.06.2017 the co-ordinate bench has confirmed a similar addition on account of Leave Travel Concession. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the co-ordinate bench, we confirm the action of the Assessing Officer. Thus, ground No. 5 of the appeal is dismissed. 11. Now we come to the appeal of the Revenue in ITA. No. 515/Del/2016. 11.1 The first ground of appeal is against the deletion of the addition of Rs. 2368.11 crores on account of difference in gross lease rent received of Rs. 5,860/- crores and lease rent of Rs. 3,491.11 crores offered for taxation which was added by the learned Assessing Officer, but deleted by the learned CIT (Appeals). The learned Assessing Officer made the addition treating the transactio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ture did not bring into existence any benefit of enduring nature. Further the Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana in 351 ITR 196 and Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in 106 taxmann.com 395 has also taken a similar view. In view of this ground Nos. 2 and 3 of the appeal of the assessee are dismissed. 15. In the result, appeal for assessment year 2011-12 filed by the assessee is partly allowed and appeal filed by the Assessing Officer is dismissed. 16. Now we come to appeal for assessment year 2012-13. ITA. No. 6082 (Del) of 2016 is filed by the Revenue and ITA. No. 5942 (Del) of 2016 is filed by the assessee. The assessee has also filed Cross Objection No. 26 (Del) of 2017. 16.1 We first take up the appeal for the Assessing Officer as well as the Cross Objection of the assessee which is against the deletion of addition of Rs. 2,935.29 crores on account of difference in gross lease rent received of Rs. 7,149.67 crores and lease rent of Rs. 4,214.38 crores offered for taxation which is made by the Assessing Officer by treating the lease as financial lease and not operational lease. The Cross Objection of the assessee is supported in nature of this issue. 16.2 As this issue is squarely covered in ....