2013 (3) TMI 760

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ave been raised for our consideration. a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal was right in setting aside the disallowance of ₹ 83,23,082/made by the Assessing Officer u/s.14A read with Rule 8D and further directing the A.O. to work out the disallowance in light of the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Godrej Boyce M .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... eld that the employees' contribution towards the superannuation fund was not allowable as deduction u/s. 36(1) (iv) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ( the Act ). However, as the same was an expenditure incurred exclusively for the purposes of business, it is allowable as a deduction under Section 37 of the Act. The grievance of the revenue is that once an expenditure specifically provided for in Se .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... pers and Board Mills Pvt. Ltd. (supra) the issue was remanded to the Assessing officer to determine whether the expenditure has not been incurred fully and exclusively for the business before extending the benefits of Section 37 of the Act. In view of the above, we see no reason to entertain question (b). 5) Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. - - TaxTMI - TMITax .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X