9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Accordingly, question no.1 does not give rise to any substantial question of law as the issue stands concluded against the revenue by the decision of the Apex Court in S.A. Builders Ltd. (2006 (12) TMI 82 - SUPREME COURT) and of this Court in the case of Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (supra). Thus question (a) is not entertained. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - Held that:- It is an admitted position between the parties that issue raised herein stands concluded in favour of the Respondent by the decision of this Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT]. In the above case this Court has held that Rule 8(b) of the Income Tax Rules would apply with effect from Assessment Year 2008- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had invested an amount of ₹ 51.47 Crores in its subsidiaries companies without charging any interest. At the same time, the Respondent - Assessee had borrowed funds to the extent of ₹ 20.63 Crores on which it had paid interest of ₹ 1.61 Crores. Therefore, the Assessing Officer by Assessment order dated 29th December 2009 disallowed proportionate interest paid by Respondent - Assessee to the extent of ₹ 43.78 lakhs on the interest bearing funds while determining its income. (b) Being aggrieved, the Respondent carried the issue in Appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [(CIT (A)]. By an order dated 30th November 2010, the CIT (A) recorded a finding that the funds which had been invested in the subsidiar ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pondent has in its subsidiary companies. Therefore, the Appeal against the impugned order dated 21st October 2014 needs to be admitted. (e) We find that it is an admitted position that the Respondent - Assessee as an holding company had made interest free investments in its subsidiary companies. Thus the Respondent company as in case of any holding company would have interest in the success of its subsidiary companies. Thus the amounts invested in the subsidiary companies are for the purposes of the business of the Respondent - Assessee. Further as observed in S.A. Builders Ltd. (supra) that having interest free funds in excess of the amounts invested in the subsidiary companies would not lead to disallowance of interest expenditure. Bes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
