9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (11) TMI 1424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the said judgment, therefore, the said decision is not applicable to the case of the assessee and we see no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) - Decided against assessee. - ITA No.952/Hyd/2018 - - - Dated:- 24-10-2018 - Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member And Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member For the Assessee : Sri Y. Ratnakar For the Revenue : Smt. S. Praveena, DR ORDER PER Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.: This is assessee s appeal for the Assessment Year 2012 -13 against the order of the CIT(A), Guntur -1 dated 13.03.2018. the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: - 1. That the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the A.O. to recalculate the disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) instea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... enses relating to the seaways division have been charged in the accoun ts of seaways div is ion. 2. At the time of hearing, Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the assessee does not wish to press the Grounds No. 6 and 7. They are accordingly rejected as not pressed. 3. As regards Grounds No.1 and 5 are concerned, the brief facts are that the assessee-company, engaged in the business of transportation of goods, logistics, shipping business and generation of energy, filed its return of income for the A.Y. 2011- 12 on 28/09/2012 declaring total income of ₹ 63,93,68,810/- after claiming deduction under Chapter VI -A of ₹ 2,25,19,122/-. Subsequently, the return was revised by the assessee on 25.03.2014 revising it ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... record, we find that in the assessee s own case, this Tribunal has already held that the disallowance under Rule 8D is to be computed only on the investments which have yielded exempt income and not on the entire investments. The CIT(A) has accordingly computed the disallowance. Rule 8D has come into force w.e.f 24th March, 2008 and the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of ITO vs. Daga Capital has held that the said provision is applicable prospectively. The decision relied upon by the Learned Counsel for the Assessee is for the A.Y. 2005-06 as is evident from para 3.1 of the said judgment, therefore, the said decision is not applicable to the case of the assessee and we see no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A). Accor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
