9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 60X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in the context of present case which concerns the assessment year 2009-10, Rule 8D was already brought in the statute. However, a pre-condition to applicability to Rule 8D is that as per Sub-section 2 of Section 14A, the Assessing Officer having regard to the accounts of the assessee is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of the expenditure in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act. When we find that consistently it is a finding of the fact in case of assessee over a period of time that the assessee had own sufficient funds for making investments in shares, the disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A. Tax Appeal dismissed. - INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Suresh Kumar, the learned counsel appearing in support of this Appeal for Revenue fairly invites our attention to the latest judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court rendered in Commissioner v/s Mahindra and Maindra Limited in Civil Appeal Nos. 6949 to 6950 of 2004 and others decided on April 24, 2018. 5. The Hon'ble Supreme Court held that on a plain reading of Section 28 (iv) of the Income Tax Act, it appears that for the applicability of the said provision, the income which can be taxed shall arise from the business or profession. Also, in order to invoke this provision, the benefit which is received has to be in some other form rather than in the shape of money. If that is because of the remission loan liability as in this ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... It was therefore, that the Tribunal had deleted the disallowance of interest expenditure. In the present case which pertains to the assessment year 2009-10, Rule 8D was applicable. The Tribunal, therefore, committed a serious error in ignoring such statutory provision. 7. It appears to be a consistent view of the CIT Appeals and the Tribunal in the earlier assessment years as well as the present one that the investment in shares was made by the assessee from its own funds and not from interest bearing borrowed funds. In this context, Division Bench of this Court in case of Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. HDFC Bank Limited (2014)366 ITR 505(Bom) has observed as under : We find that the facts of the present case are squarely cover ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
