9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 1652X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iven to the AO to verify the same - HELD THAT:- We find merit in the contention of DR and the assessee has not raised any objection in this regard, we restore this issue to the file of the AO for deciding the same afresh after considering the submissions made on behalf of the assessee before the Tribunal. Ground of the assessee s appeal are accordingly treated as allowed for statistical purpose. Disallowance of long term capital loss on sale of shares - period of acquisition of the shares - acquisition of shares on the basis of share certificates issued on amalgamation in lieu of the shares originally purchased/acquired by the assessee - HELD THAT:- As contended that the period of acquisition of these shares thus was September, 1988 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ld. CIT(A) 3. The assessee in the present case is an individual who filed her return of income for the year under consideration on 23.09.2013 declaring a total income of ₹ 1,87,68,010/-. In the said return, dividend income of ₹ 2,36,300/- received during the year under consideration was claimed to be exempt by the assessee. No disallowance on account of expenditure incurred in relation to the said exempt income however was offered by the assessee as required by the provisions of section 14A. The AO, therefore, applied Rule 8D to work out the expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to the exempt income at ₹ 5,35,092/- and made a disallowance to that extent u/s 14A. 4. The disallowance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 851/- having been actually claimed by the assessee as deduction, the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the said amount actually claimed by the assessee. The learned DR has contended that these submissions now being specifically made by the learned counsel for the assessee for the first time before the Tribunal require rectification and an opportunity may be given to the AO to verify the same. We find merit in the contention of learned DR and the learned counsel for the assessee has not raised any objection in this regard, we restore this issue to the file of the AO for deciding the same afresh after considering the submissions made on behalf of the assessee before the Tribunal. Ground No. 1 and 2 of the assessee s appeal are accordingly tr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -do- 29-06-92 101 10.00 1,010 -do- 06-08-92 7449 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6000 l 0,920 21 840 2001-02 3000 5,460 10920 1992-93 101 1,010 3858 1992-93 1995-96 4899 2550 7449 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Prop (P) Ltd. in the year 1996, she was allotted 2550 shares of M/s. Amarjyoti Prop (P) Ltd. in lieu of shares held by her in M/s. ABC Developers Pvt. Ltd. He has contended that the period of acquisition of these shares thus was September, 1988 and June/July, 1992 as rightly claimed by the assessee for working out the indexed cost of acquisition while computing the long term capital loss and the authorities below were not justified in taking the dates of acquisition of said shares on the basis of share certificates issued by M/s. Amarjyoti Prop (P) Ltd. on amalgamation in lieu of the shares originally purchased/acquired by the assessee in the year 1988 and 1992. Since this contention raised by the learned counsel for the assessee is duly s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
