9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1237X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urview of section 14A. No reason to interfere with or deviate from the findings of the learned CIT (Appeals) in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(ii). Consequently, grounds raised by Revenue are dismissed. - I.T. A. No.1365/Bang/2018 - - - Dated:- 5-9-2018 - Shri Jason P Boaz, Accountant Member And Shri Laliet Kumar, Judicial Member For the Appellant : Dr. P. V. Pradeep Kumar, Addl. CIT (D.R) For the Respondent : None ORDER PER SHRI JASON P BOAZ, A.M. : This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, Bangalore dt.29.12.2017 for the Assessment Year 2014-15. Since none was present for the assessee when the case was called for hearing, this appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in it has raised the following grounds :- 1. The Order of the Ld. CIT (A), in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue, is opposed to law and the fact and circumstances of the case. 2. On facts of the case, Whether the decision of the Ld CIT (A) is right in allowing the appeal of the assessee despite the fact that the provisions to section 14A makes it clear that the expenditure has to be worked out as per Rule 8D(2)(ii) 8D(2)(iii). 3. On facts of the case, whether the decision of the [ad CIT (A) is right in allowing the appeal of assessee as the same contravenes the provisions of section 14A and also the Ld CIT (A) has not followed instructions laid down in the Board's Circular No 5/2014 dated wherein, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(ii); which is the issue for consideration before us. It is seen that in the case on hand the assessee's contention has all along been that investment in mutual funds and shares have been out of its own fund and not out of interest bearing funds; which have been utilized and specifically invested in the assets for which they had been taken. 5.2.2 On a perusal of the impugned order, we find that the learned CIT (Appeals), has in para 7.1 thereof, considered the disallowances made by the Assessing Officer under Rule 8D(2)(ii); the submissions of the assessee thereon and finally decided the issue in favour of the assessee by deleting the disallowance of ₹ 1,21,36,406 under Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
