2015 (6) TMI 140

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed towards expenses for earning the dividend income. CIT(A) therefore, made a revised disallowance been accepted by Tribunal. No substantial question of law - See Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT [2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assesse. - Income Tax Appeal No. 1131 of 2013 - - - Dated:- 13-4-2015 - S. C. Dharmadhikari And A. K. Menon, JJ. For the Appella .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... w, as they arise out of the Tribunal's order dated 1492012. 4. We find that the Tribunal has confirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). At page 19 of the paperbook (para 4 of the Commissioner's order), the Commissioner took into account the words of the Rule and found that the figures as derived by the Assessing Officer cannot be taken into consideration. One can a .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... en decided by this Court. Both the authorities in this case have followed this Judgment and applied Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. They have been applied correctly. The first question is, therefore, not a substantial question of law at all. 6. The second question pertains to the application of the Rule and which raises a pure factual issue. We .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X