9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (12) TMI 1696X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals were identical. Therefore, both the appeals were heard together and are being disposed off by way of a common order. For the sake of convenience we shall be dealing with facts in the case of I.T.A No.429/Chd/17 relating to assessment year 2011-12. I.T.A. No 429/Chd/2017 (A.Y 2011-12): 3. Ground no. 1 raised by the revenue reads as under: "i) "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition of Rs. 25,24,786/- made on account of disallowance of Bank Charges." 4. The Revenue in the above ground has challenged the deletion of disallowance of bank charges of Rs. 25,240,786/- The main reason for making the impugned disallowance by the A.O. was that the assessee compa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in Saw. the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was justified in restricting the addition of Rs. 2,86.58,780/- to Rs. 1.67,075/-made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and thereby allowing relief of Rs. 2, 84,91, 705/- to the assessee". 9. The aforesaid ground relates to the issue of disallowance of expenses made as per the provisions of section 14A of the Act. Briefly stated the A.O. made the impugned disallowance on account of the fact that the assessee company had made investments in shares/mutual funds, the income from which was exempt from tax. Therefore invoking the provision of section ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es which were sufficient for making the impugned investments of Rs. 34.65 Crores. Copies of financial statements of the said years were also filed. Based on the above facts the Ld. CIT(Appeals), we find, deleted the disallowance made following the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd. The said proposition has been reiterated by the Hon,ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Max India Ltd. in ITA no.186 of 2013 (O&M) vide order dt.06-0916. The Ld. DR has not controverted the aforestated facts before us nor has any contrary decision of the jurisdictional High Court been brought to our notice. We therefore see no reason to disturb the order of the Ld. CIT(Appeals). 13. In view of the above, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
