TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 524
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessing Officer to disallow the depreciation on Plant & Machinery leased to various parties; 2) Upholding the addition made by the Assessing Officer u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Both the above actions being grossly arbitrary, palpably erroneous and totally unlawful must be quashed with directions for appropriate relief." 2. Ground no. 1 is regarding disallowance of depreciation on Plant & Machinery leased to various parties. The assessee is a Public Sector Company incorporated with the object to provide medium and long term credit to the Industries as well as provide assistance and services to the industrial and service concerns for their new projects. The assessee has ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f same were produced for the first time before him, he should have admitted the same as additional evidence under Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules and either he himself should have verified or should have referred the same to the Assessing Officer for verification. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was passed in the year 2015, however, nothing has been brought on record before us that anything wrong has been observed by the Departmental Authorities in those certificates. Before us, the Ld. DR has also not pointed out anything wrong with those certificates submitted before the Ld CIT(A). In the facts and circumstances of the case and following the decision of the Tribunal (supra), we do not find any justification or cause for issuing dire....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... made by the AO is liable to be deleted. He has also relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT, 402 ITR 640. 7. On the other hand, Ld. DR has submitted that for the year under consideration the AO has recorded the fact that no evidence has been furnished by the assessee to establish that no expenses have been incurred in earning the dividend income. The AO has observed that certain expenses like cost of borrowings, salary, employee welfare expenses, postage/telegram expenses, travelling and conveyance expenses, rent etc. are common expenses with regard to earning the dividend income and regular business income. The decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Vs.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....easons given by the Assessing Officer for rejecting the suo moto disallowance are identical as for the AY 2010-11 which are reproduced by this Tribunal in the order dated 08.10.2020. Thus, he has reiterated that the issue is covered by the decision of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for the AY 2010-11. 9. We have considered the rival submissions as well as relevant material on record. For the year under consideration, the assessee has made an investment of Rs. 1867.81 crores the dividend income of which is exempt from tax. There is no dispute that there is a significant difference in the amount of investment as on 31.03.2010 and as on 31.03.2012. The assessee has made the suo moto disallowance of Rs. 10 lacs for the AY 2010-11 and s....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n the matter of tax and each year is a separate assessment unit, therefore, until and unless the facts are identical the suo moto disallowance made in the AY 2010-11 cannot be applied for the AY 2012- 13. Hence, the decision of this Tribunal which is purely on the legal issue of non recording of satisfaction by the AO and not a finding of fact given on the merits of the issue would not operate as a binding precedent for the year under consideration. We find that the AO has clearly pointed out while issuing the show cause notice to the assessee that the assessee has not given any basis for the suo moto disallowance of Rs. 10 lacs which amounts to recording the satisfaction by the AO. When the facts for the two assessment years are entirely d....