9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (9) TMI 379X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ounsel submission that the issue in dispute is squarely covered by the ITAT, ‘G’ Bench, New Delhi decision passed in assessee’s own case for the AY 2008-09 [2016 (12) TMI 864 - ITAT DELHI] wherein same held. - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aire was issued to the assessee on 22.7.2013. In response thereto Authorised Representative of the assessee appeared and filed the requisite details. The assessee is an Advocate. During the year under consideration, the assessee derived income from salary (Pension), house property, profession, and capigal gain. The reason of scrutiny selection under CASS was to examine the source of cash deposits in saving bank account as per AIR information and sale consideration, cost claimed while computing LTCG before deduction u/s. 54B, C, D, G, GA. The Counsel of the assessee was asked to explain the same and he vide submission dated 30.1.2014 stated that the cash deposits in the saving bank account relate to the professional income of the assessee an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the assessee and accordingly, assessed the income of the assessee at ₹ 15,90,43,440/- and completed the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the I.T. Act, 1961 dated 12.3.2014. 3. Aggrieved with the assessment order dated 12.3.2014, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order dated 01.7.2015 has partly allowed the appeal. 4. Against the impugned order dated 01.7.2015, assessee has filed the Appeal before the Tribunal. 5. At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee stated that as regard the confirmation of disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Act of ₹ 5,72,868/- as against ₹ 1,25,963/- computed by the assessee as expenses related to earning of income on which tax is not payable. He further ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... last date of filing the appeal was 01.9.2015. However, the assessee was out of station and returned to Delhi only on the evening of 1st September, 2015 and therefore, he could not sign the appeal within time. Accordingly, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has requested to condone the delay of one day. After perusal of the letter dated 02.9.2015 of the Ld. Counsel of the assessee, as aforesaid, we find plausible reasons for delay in filing the appeal. Hence, we condone the delay of 01 day in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to adjudicate the issue in dispute. 7.1 We find that disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Act of ₹ 5,72,868/- was against ₹ 1,25,963/- computed by the assessee as expenses related to earning of incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions:- CIT Vs Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (Delhi High Court) ITA 115/2014 & 119/2014 dated 25-11-2014 Disallowance of expenses on exempt income uls 14A r.w Rule 80 - investments in shares and mutual funds - Held that:- In Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2011 (11) TMI 267 - Delhi High Court] it has been held that it is only when the AO is not satisfied with the claim of the assessee, that the Legislature directs him to follow the method that may be prescribed - the findings recorded by the CIT(A) and the Tribunal are appropriate and relevant - the assessee had sufficient funds for making investments in shares and mutual funds - The self or voluntary deductions made by the assessee were not rejected and held ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
