TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (6) TMI 938
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al for AY 2012-13. The impugned order is common order for both the years. First, we take up cross-appeals for AY 2012-13 which arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Chennai [CIT(A)] dated 23.08.2018 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. AO u/s 143(3) on 31.03.2015. The grounds raised by the assessee read as under: 1. Disallowance u/s Rule 8D - Rs.1,05,58,230 : This is a covered issue in favour of the assessee, as per Para 6.7 of the decision of Hon'ble ITAT, "D" Bench in its order dt. 22.07.2016 in ITA No.495/Mds/2015 for AY 2011-12 which held the issue in favour of the assessee subject to verification of facts by the Id. AO. Subsequently, the Id. AO verified the facts and deleted th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....onal Terminals Private Ltd. (CITPL) which was commissioned. Against the same, the assessee claimed deduction u/s 80IA (4) for Rs.31.27 Crores and was required by Ld. AO to demonstrate the fulfillment of conditions of the statutory provisions. Though the assessee justified the deduction, however, Ld. AO denied the same on the ground that actual operations were done by CITPL and therefore, the deduction would not be available to the assessee.The Ld. AO also made disallowance u/s 14A for Rs.112.95 Lacs since the assessee earned exempt income. This disallowance has been revised to Rs.105.58 Lacs in the rectification order dated 26.06.2015. Appellate Proceedings 4. During appellate proceedings, the assessee, inter-alia, relied on the decis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efined in CBDT Circular No. 10 dated 16.12.2005 includes structures at the ports for storage, loading and unloading etc. This Circular does not in any way restrict the term port to only the structure at the terminal of a port but also clarifies that such structure for storage, loading, unloading etc. will also be included in the definition of port. The term 'port' was a larger term and not restricted just to the structures only. Further, the terminal was developed on BOT model whereby the gross revenue was split at source level between the assessee and CITPL. The assessee also produced certificate from CITPL wherein it was certified that the profits / losses of CITPL were arrived at by considering their respective revenue share only. Thus, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... as defined in CBDT Circular No. 10 dated 16.12.2005 includes structures at the ports for storage, loading and unloading etc. The project fulfilled all the stipulate conditions. The gross revenue was split at source level between the assessee and CITPL. The same is further supported by the certificate from CITPL wherein it was certified that the profits / losses of CITPL were arrived at by considering their respective revenue share only. The other entity has been allowed similar deduction and there is no reason as to why the deduction is not available to the assessee. Thus, the adjudication in the impugned order could not be faulted with. The cited case laws support the case of the assessee. Accordingly, the revenue's appeal stands dismisse....