9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1306X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (A) in restricting the disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D to the dividend income earned by the assessee during these three Assessment years which are under appeal before us. Accordingly, we sustain the order of the CIT(A) and uphold the findings. Grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. - ITA NOs. 7073, 7074 & 7092/MUM/2017, CO Nos. 30, 31 & 32/MUM/2019 - - - Dated:- 8-5-2019 - Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'ble Judicial Member And Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Hon'ble Accountant Member For the Assessee : Shri K. Gopal And Ms. Neha Paranjpe For the Department : Shri Anadi Varma ORDER PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) 1. These three appeals and cross objection ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .) Ltd v. PCIT [170 ITD 370 (ASR)], in the case of J.H. Fin Vest (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT [148 ITD 326 (Del)] and Doubledot Finance Ltd v. DCIT [65 SOT 324 (Mum)]. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the Authorities below. On a perusal of the decision of the Coordinate Bench, we find that identical issue came up for hearing for the A.Y. 2011-12 wherein the Tribunal sustained the order of the Ld.CIT(A) in restricting the disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D to the dividend income earned by the assessee during the relevant Assessment year. While holding so, the Tribunal concluded as under: - 6. We have gone through the entire material on record in the light of the rival contentions of the parties. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9. In the present case, the AO has not firstly disclosed why the appellant/ ssessee s claim for attributing ₹ 2,97,440 as a disallowance under s. 14A had to be rejected Taikisha Engg. India Ltd. (supra) says that the jurisdiction to proceed further and determine amounts is derived after examination of the accounts and rejection if any of the assesses s claim or explanation. The second aspect is there appears to have been no scrutiny of the accounts by the AO an aspect which is completely unnoticed by the CIT (A) and the Tribunal. The third, and in the opinion of this Court, important anomaly which we cannot be unmindful is that whereas the entire tax exempt income is ₹ 48,90,000, the disallowance ultimately directe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
