9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Disallowance of indirect expenses u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Summary: The appeal was made against the order of CIT(A) - II, Ludhiana for the assessment year 2007-08 u/s 143(3) of the IT Act. The only ground of appeal was the adhoc disallowance of indirect expenses at Rs. 50,000 under Rule 8D. Despite the absence of the assessee, the issue was considered after hearing the Ld. DR for the Revenue. The main issue in the appeal was the disallowance of Rs. 50,000 on account of indirect expenses related to the earning of exempt income. The Assessing Officer had noted dividend income of Rs. 3.35 crores and investments in equity. The assessee claimed the dividend income as exempt under section 10(34) / 10(35) of the Act. The Assessing Officer, invoking section 14A, computed the disallowance at Rs. 4,94,720. The CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to Rs. 50,000, citing that Rule 8-D was not applicable to the year under appeal. The assessee challenged the disallowance of expenses under Rule 8-D, which was deemed not applicable to the year under appeal. The constitutional validity of section 14A(2) & (3) and Rule 8D was upheld by the Bombay High Court. The Court clarified that Rule 8D was to be applied prospectively from 01.04.2007. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of Rs. 50,000 related to the earning of exempt income. Following the Bombay High Court's ruling, the disallowance of Rs. 50,000 was upheld as expenditure related to the earning of exempt income under section 14A. Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed. The order was pronounced in the Open Court on June 21, 2011.
|
