Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2018 (9) TMI 1405

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... m/2012, 1857&5763/Mum/2013: The grounds raised by the department in all these appeals are common. The first common issue in ground nos. 1 & 2 of the aforesaid appeals relate to disallowance made of different amounts u/s. 14A read with rule 8D (2)(ii). Since, the facts relating to this issue are common in all the assessment years under appeal, except, the quantum, for the sake of convenience, we shall deal with the facts as involved in ITA No.4417/Mum/2012 for A.Y. 2008-09. 3. Brief, facts are the assessee - a company, is engaged in manufacture and trading of electrical goods. For the assessment year under dispute assessee filed its return of income on 30.09.2008 declaring total income at Nil under the normal provisions after set-off of .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... dingly, applying the methodology prescribed under Rule 8D he disallowed interest expenditure of Rs. 2,02,13,803/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and administrative expenditure of Rs. 21,26,124/- under Rule 8D(2)(iii), total disallowance aggregating to Rs. 2,23,39,927/-. However, the Assessing Officer allowed exemption in respect of dividend income of Rs. 19,82,960/-. Being aggrieved of disallowance made u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). 4. The learned CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee in the context of fact and material available before him, observed that as against surplus interest free funds available with the assessee to the tune of Rs. 398.79 crore, the investments made by the assesse .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... o demonstrate availability of interest free surplus funds with the assessee, the learned AR drew our attention to a chart indicating the surplus interest free funds available from A.Y. 1992-93 to A.Y 2008-09. He submitted, the investments on which assessee has earned exempt income during the year were made in A.Y. 1993-94 and in that assessment year also the assessee had sufficient interest free funds available with it to make investment. Thus, the learned AR submitted, learned CIT(A)'s decision to delete the disallowance of interest expenditure made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) is in consonance with the ratio of decision laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities Ltd (supra) and CIT vs. HDFC Bank L .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... Y. 2008-09, each year assessee had sufficient interest free funds available with it, which is more than the investments made. Therefore, applying the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities Ltd (supra) and CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd.(supra), no disallowance of expenditure can be made under Rule 8D(2)(ii). That being so, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) read with section 14A of the Act. This ground is dismissed. 8. The common issue raised in ground no.2 of all these appeals is with regard to applicability of section 14A read with Rule 8D while computing book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act. Briefly, fac .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... bove, we uphold the decision of the learned CIT(A) by dismissing the ground raised. 10. Our aforesaid decision applies mutatis mutandis to the other two appeals of the Revenue under consideration. In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. 11. CO 124, 125 & 126/M/2016 All these cross-objections have been filed by the assessee with inordinate delay. The cross-objections have been filed basically challenging the decision of the CIT(A) in sustaining the disallowance of administrative expenditure made u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D(iii). However, at the time of hearing, the learned AR on the instruction of his client did not press the crossobjection. Accordingly, the cross-objections are dismissed as not pressed 12. To sum up, th .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates