2014 (1) TMI 844 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of expenses u/s 14A read with Rule 8D of the Act Disallowance of interest and administrative expenditure - Held that - The AO cannot invoke the provisions of Rule 8D until and unless, he gives a specific and cogent reasons which would accord his satisfaction, that the accounts cannot be relied upon - There was no basis or satisfaction having been recorded by the AO - The AO has nowhere made any reference with regard to the claim of the assessee, concerning expenses, having direct nexus with the exempt income order of the CIT(A) set aside and the matter remitted back to the AO for deletion of disallowance worked out in accordance with the provisions of section 14A(2) read with Rule 8D Decided in favour of Assessee.

Summary

Issues: Disallowance of expenses u/s 14A read with Rule 8D

Analysis:
1. The appeal was filed against the order of CIT(A)-26, Mumbai, confirming the disallowance of interest and administrative expenditure attributed to income earned on investments in equity shares and mutual funds under section 14A by invoking Rule 8D. The grounds raised included challenging the disallowance, proportionate interest expenditure, and the restriction of disallowance to total expenditure claimed.

2. The only issue raised pertained to the disallowance of expenses under section 14A read with Rule 8D. The assessee claimed interest income as exempt, and the AO computed the disallowance at Rs. 1,98,32,034 against total expenditure debited in the Income & Expenditure Account at Rs. 43,13,896. The assessee argued that a portion of the expense had a direct nexus with interest income, but the AO proceeded with the disallowance.

3. The CIT(A) sustained the disallowance, leading the assessee to appeal before the ITAT. The AR contended that the AO mechanically invoked Rule 8D without examining the accounts or recording satisfaction, contrary to precedents requiring the AO to be satisfied with the correctness of the claim before invoking Rule 8D.

4. The ITAT, after hearing arguments from both sides, referred to relevant provisions of section 14A(2) and previous judgments. The ITAT emphasized that the AO cannot invoke Rule 8D without specific and cogent reasons, as highlighted in previous cases. The ITAT cited the necessity for the AO to be objectively satisfied based on the accounts before applying Rule 8D.

5. Consequently, the ITAT found no basis or satisfaction recorded by the AO as per the Act's provisions and relevant case law. The ITAT set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the AO to delete the disallowance, emphasizing compliance with section 14A(2) read with Rule 8D. The appeal filed by the assessee was allowed, and the disallowance was deleted.

6. In conclusion, the ITAT's judgment focused on the necessity for the AO to be satisfied with the correctness of the claim before invoking Rule 8D for disallowance under section 14A, emphasizing compliance with legal provisions and precedents to ensure fair procedure and assessment.