TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (1) TMI 335
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....emiconductor devices, chips, subassemblies and electronic instruments. For the assessment year 2013- 14, they have filed the return of income on 30/9/2013 declaring an income of Rs. 30,01,118/-. Assessment under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short "the Act") was, however, complete by determining the income of the assessee at Rs. 3,55,44,997/-by making addition of Rs. 2,18,19,347/-on account of disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules1962 ("the Rules"), Rs. 4,88,515/-on account of disallowance under section 36 (1)(iii) of the Act and a sum of Rs. 24,59,941/-under section 50C of the Act. 3. All these three additions were challenged before the Ld. CIT(A) but without any success. Hen....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....02.99 crores whereas the total of all the investments was only Rs. 85.91 crores. So far as this plea of the assessee is concerned, we find no adverse comment by the authorities. Going by this fact we hold that when the own funds of the assessee exceed the investments, the presumption is that the assessee made the investment from out of their own funds, though all the funds are held in the same account. 7. Record does not reveal the quantum of the investment which yielded exempt income. We therefore, restore the issue to the file of the learned Assessing Officer to consider only such investments which yielded the tax free income, but not the entire investments. Further in Vireet Investments Private Limited 165 ITR 27, it is held by the Spec....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e sale deed at Rs. 99.19 Lacs, learned Assessing Officer did not dispute the same. However insofar as the consideration for land is concerned, according to the agreement it was Rs. 3.06 crores, according to collector's rate as on such date it was Rs. 3.00 crores, but as on the date of registration of sale deed it was Rs. 3.30 crores. Since there is difference in the consideration mentioned in the sale deed and the prevailing collector's rate as on the date was Rs. 3.30 crores, learned Assessing Officer sought to add a sum of Rs. 24,59,941/-. 10. Submissions on behalf of the assessee are twofold. Firstly, that according to the proviso to section 50C of the Act, as inserted by finance Act, 2016, when the date of registration for the transfer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sidered, in which case the difference less than 1% does not require any interference at the end of the learned Assessing Officer. 12. Learned DR places reliance on the orders of the authorities below. 13. We have gone through the record in the light of submissions made on either side. Coming to the retrospective nature of the amendment to section 50C of the Act by inserting the proviso, we find that in the case of CIT vs. Shri Vummudi Amarendran (supra), Hon'ble High Court held that the amendment made by the Finance Act, 2016 inserting proviso to section 50C is clarificatory in nature and therefore, had the retrospective application. For the sake of completeness, we extract the relevant observations of the Hon'ble High Court at paragraph ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nsideration for such transfer. Thus an amendment by insertion of proviso seeks to relieve the assessee from undue hardship 12. The Honble Supreme Court in Kolkata Export Company took note of the earlier decisions on the same issue in the case of Allied Motors Private Limited Vs. CIT[1997 (224) ITR 677 (SC)], Whirlpool of India Limited Vs. CIT, New Delhi [2000 (245) ITR 3], CIT Vs. Amrid Banaspati Company Limited [2002 (255) ITR 114] and CIT vs. Alom Enterprises [2009 (319) ITR 306] and held that the new proviso should be given retrospective effect from the insertion on the ground that the proviso was added to remedy unintended consequences and supply an obvious omission. -The proviso ensured reasonable interpretation and retrospective e....