TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 773
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Manufacturing/ Trading / Exporting /Distributing of all kinds of High Security Number Plates and other connecting activities. AO has noted that the business of the assessee had not commenced till the end of the year under consideration. Assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2012-13 on 29.09.2012 showing loss of Rs. 69,05,408/-. Subsequently, it revised the return of income on 29.03.2014 declaring loss of Rs. 1,88,21,050/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter, assessment was framed u/s 143(3) vide order dated 30.03.2015 and the total loss was determined at Rs. 35,61,712/-. 4. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) who vide order dated 26.09.2016 in Appeal No.170/15-16 allowe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on behalf of the assessee nor any adjournment application was filed on its behalf. In such a situation we proceed to dispose of the appeal ex parte qua the assessee after considering the material on record and after hearing the DR. 6. First ground is with respect to the disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act. 7. During the course of assessment proceedings, AO noticed that assessee had claimed interest of Rs. 1,48,94,552/- of which Rs. 29,78,910/- was transferred on Capital Work in progress and the balance amount debited in the P&L account was Rs. 1,19,15,642/-. The assessee was asked to furnish the details and justify of interest debited to P&L A/c. The submissions made by the assessee of the claim of expenses was not found acceptable....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he present ground is with respect to deletion of disallowance of interest by invoking the provision of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. We find that while allowing the claim of the assessee, CIT(A) has given a finding that payee has included the interest income in its total income and has also filed the return of income and therefore no disallowance can be made in the hands of the assessee in view of the fact that the 2nd proviso to said section has been held to be clarificatory in nature. CIT(A) had also relied on the decision in the case of Rajeev Agarwal (supra) while deciding the issue. We find that Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Ansal Land Mark Township Pvt. Ltd. (2015) has also held that second proviso to Section 40(a)(i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t allowable to assessee. He also noted that the short-term capital loss was not properly substantiated with supporting evidence. He accordingly denied the claim of the assessee. 13. Aggrieved by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) who decided the issue in favour of the assessee by observing as under: "I have considered the submission of the appellant and observation of the AO made in the assessment order on the issue. It is seen that appellant has purchased a plot of lease hold land alongwith building structure standing thereon for setting up of its factory at D-89/3, TTC Industrial Area, MIDC, Turbhe, Nai Mumbai-400705 in FY 2007-08. The said leasehold land was purchased from Sh. Ashwin M Sha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unt so paid by the appellant was solely for the land. The AO has also held that without prejudice to the above, the provisions of section 50(2) of the Act is applicable in the case of transfer of any block of assets whereas in the instant case there is no such transfer, therefore, the AO disallowed the claim of short term capital loss. It is seen that appellant had purchased said building alongwith the land and cost of the building and land was apportioned proportionately. The appellant has shown the cost of building under the head Fixed Assets whereas the cost of land was shown under the head Non-current Investment. In its return of income the appellant has claimed depreciation on the said building and the cost of the lan....