9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 1209X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cability of section 14A which is based on theory of apportionment of expenditure between taxable and non-taxable income. Therefore, to that extent, expenditure incurred in acquiring those shares will have to be apportioned - this ground of appeal is restored to the file of Assessing Officer for deciding the issue afresh Income accrued in India - Taxability in India - Exclusion of income of foreign branches situated in countries where there is double tax avoidance agreement based on Article 7 of the respective agreements which provides that business profits is to be taxed in respective countries - HELD THAT:- The issue has been decided against the assessee by the ITAT in assessee s own case for A.Y. 2011-12 income of the foreign branches of the assessee shall also be taxable in India, that is, it would be included in the return income filed by the assessee in India and whatever taxes have been paid by the branches in the other countries credit of such taxes shall be given. Disallowance of broken period interest - HELD THAT:- We find that identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Citibank [ 2008 (8) TMI 766 - SUPREME COURT] and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of common pool, nexus of borrowed fund and investment cannot be ruled out. The Assessing Officer also drew adverse inference from computation by the assessee of interest expenses relatable funds deployed towards eligible business as per provisions of section 36(1)(viii) of the Act. Thereafter the Assessing Officer proceeded to computing disallowance as per Rule 8D and made impugned disallowance for A.Y. 2015-16. 5. In both assessment years learned CIT(A) upheld the action of the Assessing Officer following his earlier orders. Against these orders the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. Learned Counsel of the assessee has submitted that identical issue was decided in favour of the assessee by the ITAT Delhi Bench in the case of Punjab National Bank (ITA No. 5480/Del/2014). 7. Learned Counsel of the assessee further submitted that this issue was decided partly in favour of the assessee by the ITAT in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2011-12 in ITA no. 4505/Mum/2016 and others, wherein issue was remitted back to the Assessing Officer to consider various decisions. 8. Upon careful consideration, we note that ITAT in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2013-14 by consolidat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and perused the record, we deem it appropriate to remit this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with same direction as above. 10. Another common issue raised in assessee's appeals is that learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed assessee's claim in respect of exclusion of income of foreign branches situated in countries where there is double tax avoidance agreement based on Article 7 of the respective agreements which provides that business profits is to be taxed in respective countries. It has further been submitted that learned CIT(A) failed to note that Notification No. 91 of 2008 relied upon by ITAT does not apply to business profit but only to other sources of income. 11. On this issue learned Counsel of the assessee fairly conceded that the issue has been decided against the assessee by the ITAT in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2011-12 in ITA No. 4504/Mum/2016 vide para 19 of the said order. 12. Accordingly following the precedent as above, we uphold the order of learned CIT(A) on this issue. Revenue's appeal 13. One common issue raised relates to broken period interest. 14. On this issue consequent upon Assessing Officer's disallowance, learned CIT(A) has decided t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cord we find that the ITAT in the aforesaid decision has duly considered the said notification referred by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee. We may carefully refer to the contents of the said notification as under; "In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (3) of section 90 of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), the Central Government hereby notifies that where an agreement entered into by the Central Government with the Government of any country outside India for granting relief to tax, or as the case may be, avoidance of double taxation, provides that any income of a resident of India "may be taxed" in the other country, such income shall be included in his total income chargeable to tax in India in accordance with the provisions of the Income-Tax Act, 1961 (43 of 1961), and relief shall be granted in accordance with the method for elimination or avoidance of double taxation provided in such agreement." 25. We find that after taking into account the aforesaid notification the Tribunal in the aforesaid order has concluded as under. "In view of the aforesaid findings/conclusion, we hold that the income of the branches of the assessee shall ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n for wage arrears. The ld. AR for the assessee submits that this ground of appeal is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2009-10 in ITA. No. 2480/M/2015. The ld. DR for the revenue fairly conceded the submissions of the ld. AR for the assessee. 47. We have considered the submissions of the ld. representatives of the parties and perused the record. We have noted that the assessee raised the identical ground of appeal in assessment year 2009-10 and the Tribunal vide order dated 17.02.2017 in ITA 2480/M/2015 deleted the similar disallowance. The coordinate bench deleted the similar disallowance by following the decision in earlier year in ITA No. 4619 and 4873/M/2012. Thus, considering the consistent view taken by the Tribunal, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed. 23. Respectfully following the above, we uphold the order of learned CIT(A) on this issue. 24. One issue raised in ITA no. 1221/Mum/2018 for A.Y.2015-16 relates to amortization of investment. 25. In this regard the Revenue has submitted that learned CIT(A) has erred in admitting and allowing the issue regarding claim of amortization ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
