9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (8) TMI 1485X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the details of indirect expenditure before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), however, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not considered the submissions of the assessee on this aspect. We find that in the case of Gillette Group India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax [2012 (6) TMI 406 - ITAT DELHI] has restricted the disallowance u/s. 14A to the extent of expenditure debited to P & L account. Similar view has been taken in the case of Income Tax Officer Vs. Pioneer Radio Training Services Pvt. Ltd.[2015 (1) TMI 964 - ITAT DELHI] and in the case of M/s. Search Enviro Ltd. Vs. ACIT [2012 (3) TMI 509 - ITAT MUMBAI] - in principle we agree with the proposition mooted by the ld. AR - the indirect expenditur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d the disallowance made by Assessing Officer under Rule 8D(2)(ii) i.e. ₹ 3,14,582/-. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the disallowance of ₹ 10,92,618/- under Rule 8D(2)(iii). The ld. AR submitted that the assessee had categorically stated before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that disallowance u/s. 14A cannot exceed the actual expenditure incurred for earning exempt income. The ld. AR pointed that indirect expenditure incurred by the assessee and debited to P L Account is to the tune of ₹ 25,78,927/-. Out of the aforesaid expenditure, expenditure to the tune of ₹ 22,43,620/- is unrelated to earning of exempt income. Thus, disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) cannot exceed ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ; 3,35,307/- (Rs.25,78,927/- - ₹ 22,43,620/-). We observe that the assessee had furnished the details of indirect expenditure before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), however, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has not considered the submissions of the assessee on this aspect. We find that the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Gillette Group India (P.) Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) has restricted the disallowance u/s. 14A to the extent of expenditure debited to P L account. Similar view has been taken in the case of Income Tax Officer Vs. Pioneer Radio Training Services Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and in the case of M/s. Search Enviro Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra). In light of the decisions referred a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
