2019 (5) TMI 1383 - AT - Income Tax

Addition u/s 14A read with rule 8D - disallowance of expenses attributable to earning of exempt income - assessee has made disallowance suo-moto which has been tabulated by the tax auditor in the tax audit report - AO has not recorded any objective satisfaction as to how the disallowance as calculated by the assessee is wrong - HELD THAT - AO has not recorded any satisfaction as to how the disallowance worked out by the assessee is wrong having regards to the books of accounts of the assessee. Co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal while deciding the case of the assessee 2019 (4) TMI 1654 - ITAT MUMBAI wherein it has been held that the AO has not recorded any objective satisfaction as to how the disallowance as calculated by the assessee is wrong by referring to the books of accounts of the assessee. Accordingly, we, respectfully, following the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court 2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT and also the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case in A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11, set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to accept the disallowance as calculated by the assessee. The ground no. 1 is allowed. Excess interest charged u/s 234C - excess interest charged under section 234C which has occurred due to non granting of credit of TDS - HELD THAT - We observe that in this case the only issue is excess interest charged u/s 234C which has occurred due to non granting of credit of TDS to the tune of ₹ 14,85,028/-. In our opinion, this interest needs to be calculated correctly as per the provisions of law. Therefore, the issue is restored to the file of the AO with the direction to calculate the interest after allowing credit of TDS as per facts and law after affording a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D
2. Excess interest charged under section 234C

Issue 1: Disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D:
The appeal was against the order confirming the addition made by the DCIT under section 14A read with rule 8D. The AO observed exempt income of &8377; 3,59,21,689/- and disallowed &8377; 6,91,341/- suo motu. The AO, however, applied rule 8D and added &8377; 45,86,331/- to the income. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision. The AR argued that the AO did not record objective satisfaction and cited relevant case laws. The AR contended that no disallowance is required under rule 8D2(ii) and only investments yielding exempt income should be considered under rule 8D2(iii). The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, citing the Bombay High Court's decision, directing the AO to accept the disallowance of &8377; 6,91,341/- as calculated by the assessee.

Issue 2: Excess interest charged under section 234C:
The assessee disputed the excess interest of &8377; 5,90,691/- charged under section 234C due to non-granting of TDS credit of &8377; 14,85,028/-. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision. The AR argued for the correct calculation of interest after allowing TDS credit. The Tribunal directed the AO to recalculate the interest after granting TDS credit, providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

In conclusion, the appeal was partly allowed for statistical purposes, with the Tribunal ruling in favor of the assessee on both issues, directing the AO to accept the disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D and recalculate the interest under section 234C after granting TDS credit.