9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1483X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessment years prior to Assessment Year 2008-09, Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rule will not be invoked to work out the disallowance of expenditure under Section 14A of the Act. The Court held that till Assessment Year 2008-2009, the disallowance of expenditure has to be done on a reasonable basis. The impugned order of the Tribunal on application of the reasonable method, disallowed expendi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 23.08.2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (the Tribunal). The impugned order relates to Assessment Year 2006-07. 2. The revenue urges the following questions of law for our consideration. (A) Whether on the facts and in the circumstance of the case and in law the Tribunal was justified in restricting the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act to the extent of 1% of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ver, save the bare statement across the bar, nothing is brought on record by the Revenue indicating that the tax effect involved in the present appeal is less than ₹ 20,00,000/-. In fact, this appeal has been adjourned on 16.11.2016, 06.12.2016 and 09.12.2016 at the request of the appellant-Revenue to enable it to file an affidavit indicating that the tax effect in the present appeal is less ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. Regarding question A (a) The impugned order of the Tribunal has allowed the respondentassessee's appeal by following the decision of this Court in Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 328 ITR 81 (Bom). In the above case, it has been held that for the assessment years prior to Assessment Year 2008-09, Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rule will not be invoked to work out the disal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... llowing the order of this Court in Otis Elevator Co. (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT, (1992) 195 ITR 682 paid for admission in a club as revenue expenditure. (b) In the above view, the impugned order of the Tribunal has followed the decision of this Court in Otis Elevator (supra). Therefore, the questions as proposed do not give rise to any substantial question of law. 7. The appeal is disposed of in t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
