2017 (11) TMI 1671 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - Held that - We agree with the contention of the assessee that if the investment which are generating taxable income or are capable of earning taxable income then same should be removed from the working of the average investment under the formula given under Rule 8D(2)(iii) because the said clause itself refers to the working of the average value of the investment the income from which does not or shall not form part of the total income. This inter alia means that if the investment which is generating income or is capable of earning taxable income then same should not be the part of the working of average value of the investment. Thus we direct the Assessing Officer to remove the investments which are either generating taxable income or capable of earning taxable income. The disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) thus should be worked out after removing such investments. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly treated as allowed. Thus maintaining the consistency with the earlier year order of the Tribunal in assessee s own case hold that the disallowance made under rule 8D(2)(iii) has to be worked out after excluding the investments which are capable of earning of taxable income. Accordingly the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Summary

Issues involved:
Confirmation of addition under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 8D by the ld.CIT(A) despite investments generating taxable income being excluded.

Analysis:

1. Issue of Disallowance under Section 14A:
The sole issue raised in this appeal is against the confirmation of addition under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 8D by the ld.CIT(A). The argument presented was that investments generating taxable income should be excluded while calculating the disallowance under section 14A. The appellant referred to a previous case where a similar issue was decided in their favor by the Tribunal. The Tribunal in the previous case held that investments generating taxable income should be removed from the working of the average investment under the formula prescribed under Rule 8D(2)(iii). The Tribunal emphasized that if investments are capable of earning taxable income, they should not be considered in the disallowance calculation. Consequently, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to exclude such investments from the calculation, leading to the disallowance being worked out after removing them.

2. Judicial Analysis and Decision:
After considering the submissions of both parties, the Tribunal analyzed the issue at hand. The Tribunal noted that the question was whether investments generating taxable income should be included or excluded while calculating the disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D. Referring to the previous judgment in the appellant's own case, the Tribunal maintained consistency and held that the disallowance under rule 8D(2)(iii) should be computed after excluding investments capable of earning taxable income. By following the precedent set in the earlier case, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, emphasizing that investments generating taxable income should not be part of the disallowance calculation under Rule 8D(2)(iii).

3. Conclusion:
In conclusion, the Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, allowing the appeal and directing the exclusion of investments capable of earning taxable income from the disallowance calculation under Rule 8D(2)(iii). The decision was based on the principle that investments generating taxable income should not be considered in the disallowance computation under section 14A of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal's judgment maintained consistency with the earlier ruling in the appellant's own case, ensuring a fair and just application of the law in the current scenario.