2021 (4) TMI 108

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....orrect in deleting the addition of Rs. 1,21,00,957/- made by the AO u/s. 14A without appreciating the departmental stand in the cases of M/s. Cheminvest Ltd. and M/s. Holcim India Ltd. which clarified the disallowance of expenditure u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D in the absence of exempt income. 2. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in holding the purchase of computers and its part as revenue in nature and deleting addition of Rs. 1,85,592/- which was held by the AO as capital in nature ignoring the fact that purchase of new computers is not allowable as revenue expenditure. 3. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting add....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....construction of its own warehouse. The fact has been stated in the audited balance sheet of GCPL for the impugned assessment year. 5. An agreement has been entered between GLFPL and GCPL for purchase of property of the assessee vide "Agreement of Sale" dated 28.07.2011. GCPL could not fulfill the conditions prescribed in the agreement which included getting the property pledged to the bank to be released within 18 months of the execution of the agreement. Therefore, GLFPL decided not to purchase the aforesaid property and cancelled the agreement vide deed of cancellation dated 21.12.2012. 6. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer treated the advance received u/s. 2(22)(e) holding, * That GLFPL has granted lo....