2014 (12) TMI 1013 - AT - Income Tax

Restriction of disallowance u/s 14A r.w Rule 8D(2)(ii) Facts properly not appreciated by the lower authority - Held that - Revenue rightly contended that neither the assessee nor AO is clear how much is to be disallowed for the reason that the details are not properly analyzed - none of the Authorities below have clearly sorted out the facts - even before the Tribunal , assessee could not substantiate, how the disallowance can be restricted at ₹ 68,69,801/- or at ₹ 74,06,707/- as the ground raised before the CIT(A) - the entire fact needs re-examination and hence, the matter is to be remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication Decided in favour of revenue.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the IT Rules, 1962.

Detailed Analysis:

Issue 1: Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act
The appeal by Revenue challenged the order of CIT(A) restricting the disallowance at Rs. 46,33,084 as opposed to the initial disallowance of Rs. 1,11,37,403 made by the Assessing Officer. The grounds raised by Revenue focused on the correctness of the disallowance and the application of Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the IT Rules. The CIT(A) observed discrepancies in the appellant's submissions regarding the disallowable expenses and the direct interest expenditure. The CIT(A) highlighted the requirement for the Assessing Officer to be satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee before applying Rule 8D. Citing relevant judicial pronouncements, the CIT(A) concluded that the AO had not pointed out any discrepancy in the amount offered for disallowance by the appellant, leading to the restriction of disallowance to Rs. 64,04,548. The CIT(A) also restricted the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) to Rs. 4,92,253, as it cannot exceed the actual expenses incurred by the appellant. The CIT(A) provided relief to the appellant by reducing the disallowance amount.

Issue 2: Re-examination of Disallowance
During the appeal hearing, the Ld. SR-DR highlighted the ambiguity in the disallowance computation and the lack of clarity on the amount to be disallowed. The appellant admitted to the mistake in the computation and suggested a revised disallowance amount of Rs. 74,06,707. The Tribunal noted the lack of clarity in the facts presented by both parties and decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order. The Tribunal directed a fresh examination of the issue by the Assessing Officer to determine the correct disallowance amount. The Tribunal partially allowed the Revenue's appeal for statistical purposes, indicating the need for a re-examination of the disallowance issue.

In conclusion, the judgment addressed the disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, emphasizing the importance of accurate computations and the Assessing Officer's satisfaction with the claim before applying Rule 8D. The decision highlighted the need for a clear analysis of facts and directed a fresh examination of the disallowance issue by the Assessing Officer.