9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1032X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... exempt income. AO, without recording proper satisfaction as envisaged by Section 14A read with Rule 8D, proceeded to apply Rule 8D, which was not in accordance with law. The onus was on AO to reject the assessee’s computations and record a finding, having regard to accounts of the assessee, as to how those computations were not satisfactory. The failure to do so oust the jurisdiction of AO to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Mumbai, [in short referred to as CIT(A) ], Appeal No. CIT(A)-17/IT-90/15-16 dated 19/06/2017 on following grounds of appeal: - The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) - 17. Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)) erred in upholding the action of the Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax -10(3)(2), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as the Assessing Officer) in disallowing a sum of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Commissioner of Income Tax-10(3)(2), Mumbai [AO] u/s. 143(3) on 03/03/2015 wherein the income of the assessee was determined at ₹ 351.84 Lacs after disallowance u/s 14A for ₹ 14.82 Lacs as against returned income of ₹ 337.01 Lacs e-filed by the assessee on 29/09/2012. The assessee being resident corporate entity is stated to be engaged in financial service sector. The disallo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the shape of Share Capital Reserves far exceeded the investments made by the assessee. However, the expense disallowance of ₹ 8.52 Lacs was confirmed, against which the assessee is in further appeal before us. 3. The Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee, agitated the additions on the ground that Ld. AO, without rejecting assessee s computations, applied Rule 8D mechanically wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iction of Ld. AO to apply Rule 8D. Another factor to be noted is that the said disallowance, considering exempt income yielding investments works out to ₹ 3.75 Lacs, against which the assessee has already offered suo-moto disallowance of ₹ 3 Lacs. Therefore, the net additional disallowance of ₹ 5.52 Lacs could not be sustained. We order so. 5. The appeal stands allowed. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
