TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1952
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....No. 118/Kol/2017. 2. In Ground No. 1, the Revenue has challenged the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the addition of Rs. 40,55,027/- made by the AO on account of cessation of liability u/s 41(1). 3. The assessee in the present case is a company which is engaged in the business of manufacturing and dealing in M.S. Ingot, M.S. Bar, M.S. Rod coil etc. The return of income for the year under consideration was filed by it on 26.09.2013 declaring a total income of Rs. 1,38,62,730/-. In the balance sheet filed along with the return of income, credit balances of M/s. Dudani Fuels Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Mahavir Trading Company were appearing at Rs. 13,08,633/- and Rs. 27,46,394/- respectively under "sundry creditors". During the course of ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....reditors had ceased to exist. I have perused the legal authorities cited by assessee along with its argument and I am of the opinion that the onus cast upon the A.O. to bring to record circumstances under which it can be decided that there has been cessation of liability has not been discharged. Accordingly, ground no. 5, 6 and 7are being allowed." 5. We have heard the arguments of both the sides on this issue and also perused the relevant material available on record. The learned DR has relied on the order of the AO in support of the Revenue's case on this issue and submitted that the confirmations of the sundry creditors filed by the assessee before the Ld. CIT(A) to show the existence of the said creditors were not filed before the AO....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CIT vs Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. (189 Taxman 50) as well as by the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd. vs DCIT (144 ITD 141) wherein it was held that no disallowance u/s 14A could be made if there was no exempt income actually earned by the assessee during the relevant year. In the present case, no exempt income was earned by the company during the year under consideration and this being the undisputed position, we find no infirmity in the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) deleting the disallowance made by the A.O. u/s 14A by relying inter alia on the decision of Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Hero Cycles (P) Ltd. (supra) as well as the decision of Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal REI ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....im of the assessee for the following reasons given in paragraph no. 4.3.3 of his impugned order: "In respect of Ground No. 3 and 4, the assessee has argued that even if the income shown by the assessee is assessed u/s 68, the assessee is eligible for the set off u/s 71 of the I.T. Act. I have carefully examined the legal position standing in respect of this issue before 01.04.2017. Only by amendment in the Finance Act, 2016, Section 115BBE does not allow set off of income assessed as cash credit u/s 68 against the loss under any other head as per the provisions of Sec. 71. The legislature in all its wisdom has decided not to allow set off of loss under any provisions of this Act w.e.f. 01.04.2017 in computing the income as per the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.....04.2017. 3. Pr. CIT vs Atha Mines Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 158 of 2018) (Cal HC). 4. Pitamber Commodity Futures Pvt. Ltd. vs ACIT (ITA No. 863/Jp/17) dtd. 21.03.18. 5. ACIT vs Sai Bhaskar Irons Pvt. Ltd. (ITA No. 108/Viz/16) dtd. 13.02.18." 12. We have considered the rival submissions and also perused the relevant material available on record. As rightly contended by the learned counsel for the assessee, the issue involved in the case of Kerala Sponge Iron Ltd. (supra) relied upon by the A.O. of his order and in the case of Shri Pradeep Kumar Todi (supra) cited by the learned DR at the time of hearing before the Tribunal was different in as much as claim was made in the said cases for set off of brought forward busi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y w.e.f A.Y. 2017-18 placed a restriction on 'set off of losses, in addition to raising of any claim of expenditure and allowance against such income. The fact that the aforesaid amendment of Sec. 115BBE by the Finance Act, 2016, w.e.f 01.04.2O17 is prospective in nature can safely be gathered from a perusal of the CBDT Circular No. 3/2017, dated 20.01.2017. In the backdrop of our aforesaid observations, it can safely be gathered that there was no embargo to claim 'set off of losses in the year under consideration i.e A.Y. 20l3-14. We thus in terms of our aforesaid observations are persuaded to subscribe to the view taken by the CIT(A) that the loss suffered by the assessee from F&O transactions could be 'set off' against th....