9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (8) TMI 37 - AT - Income TaxInterest and administrative expenditure - disallowance u/s 14A - CIT(A) restricted the disallowance at 4.03% of the total expenditure on account of interest and other expenditure - Held that - The assessment year involved in the present appeals is the A.Yr. 2006-07. As decided in case of M/s. Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Co.Ltd. vs DCIT (2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) the amendment had not been made with retrospective effect and that therefore, Rule 8D not to be used with retrospective effect and that therefore, Rule 8D cannot be used in cases prior to the Assessment Year 2007-08. Further in the case of DCIT, Circle-1, Kolkata vs M/s.Exide Industries Ltd. 2013 (6) TMI 533 - ITAT KOLKATA following the decision of Sagarika Goods and Services Pvt. Ltd. vs ITO 2013 (6) TMI 534 - ITAT KOLKATA and DCIT vs EIH Associated Hotels Ltd (2008 (1) TMI 426 - ITAT CALCUTTA-D) has restricted the disallowance u/s 14A at 1% of the exempt income for years prior to the A.Yr.2008-09. Therefore, respectfully following the same AO directed to recomput the disallowance of expenditure relating to the exempt income at 1% of the exempt income being Long Term capital gain and dividend income - appeal of the assessee partly allowed and Revenue dismissed.
Issues involved:
Cross appeals filed by the assesses and the Revenue against the orders of ld. CIT(A)-I, Kolkata dated 11.11.2011 regarding the disallowance of interest and administrative expenditure under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Analysis: Issue 1: Revenue's appeal barred by limitation The Revenue's appeal was initially barred by a 5-day limitation. However, the Revenue filed a condonation petition citing a plausible reason for the delay, which was accepted by the Tribunal. The delay was condoned, and the Revenue's appeal was admitted for hearing. Issue 2: Disallowance of interest and administrative expenditure The appeal by the assessee contested the disallowance of interest and administrative expenditure amounting to Rs.9,95,907/- under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue's appeal, on the other hand, challenged the restriction of disallowance to Rs.9,95,907/- instead of Rs.23,71,642/-. Issue 3: Calculation of disallowances The AO had disallowed Rs.23,71,642/- based on Rule 8D of the IT Rules, attributing interest and expenses to earning exempt income. The ld.CIT(A) reduced the disallowance to Rs.9,95,907/-, considering 4.03% of the total interest and other expenditure. The Tribunal upheld this decision, following the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court. Issue 4: Applicability of Rule 8D The Tribunal noted that Rule 8D cannot be applied retrospectively for years prior to the Assessment Year 2007-08, as per the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court. Following precedents, the Tribunal directed the AO to recompute the disallowance at 1% of the exempt income for the relevant assessment year. In conclusion, the Tribunal partly allowed the appeal of the assessee and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. The decision was based on the restricted application of Rule 8D and the recalculated disallowance percentage in line with judicial interpretations for the relevant assessment year.
|
