9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 659X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) has erred in law and on facts, in not apprecaiting the fact that the assessee has earned dividend income during the year which does not form part of taxable income u/s. 10 of the Income Tax Act and thus section 14A is squarely applicable in the case. (iii) The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Holicam India Ltd., facts of which case are different from the facts of instant case. (iv) The Ld. CITA(A) has erred on facts and in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 8,30,000/- made on accoutn of unverifiable purchases, relyong on his own decision in AY 2009-10 which decision has already been set aside by ITAT. (v) The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses such as audit fee, tax audit fee, filing fees etc. comes to Rs. 25,000/-. The total expenses excluding statutory expenses comes Rs. (2158387 - 25000) = Rs. 21,33,387/-. As the disallowances cannot be more than the expenses claimed in profit and loss account therefore disallowances restricted to Rs. 21,33,387/- and the same has been added u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and completed the assessment vide order dated 11.3.2014 u/s. 143(3) of the Act. 4. Aggrieved with the aforesaid assessment order, assessee appealed before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dated 15.5.2015 deleted the addition in dispute and partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Against the above mentioned impugned order dated 15.5.2015, the Revenue is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efore, the expenditure was allowed. I further find that Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Lakhani Marketing in ITA No. 970/2008 decided on 2.4.2004 made reference to two earlier decisions of the same Court in CIT vs. Hero Cycles Limited 323 ITR 518 and CIT vs. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. 319 ITR 204 to hold that Section 14A cannot be invoked when no exempt income was earned. I note that the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly observed that in the assessee's case there was no exempt income earning during the year. Respectfully following the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Holcim Pvt. Ltd. (Supra), Ld. CIT(A) has rightly held that the AO was not justified in making the disallowance and theref ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd the same are not a sustainable. Under above noted facts and circumstances, we find a just and proper to restore the assessment to the file of Assessing Officer for framing a fresh assessment, after affording few opportunity of hearing for assessee and without being prejudiced from the earlier assessment order and impugned order. Accordingly, the main ground of the revenue is deem to be allowed for statistical purposes." 9.1 Keeping in view of the aforesaid decision of the ITAT, I am of the view that in the assessment year 2009-10, the Bench has held that the Revenue Authority below has not properly considered the submissions, details, explanation and other relevant documentary evidence and related bills and vouchers, audited books of a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
