9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 371X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ddition u/s 14A - whether the provisions of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules cannot be invoked for computing the expenditure towards earning exempt income for the purpose of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act and as to whether the Tribunal was right in holding that only 2% of the exempt income earned is to be treated as an expenditure for disallowance under Section 14A ? - HELD THAT :- The Revenue cannot dispute that this issue has been decided against the Revenue in several cases and admittedly, the assessments in question are prior to 2008-09. Therefore, these questions have to be necessarily decided against the Revenue and accordingly, they are answered against the Revenue. Claim for additional depreciation - whether the Tri ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e has filed these appeals by raising the following substantial questions of law : Common questions in TCA.Nos.378 379 of 2019 : i. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the provisions of Rule 8D cannot be invoked for computing the expenditure towards earning exempt income for the purpose of disallowance under Section 14A for the present year and right in holding that only 2% of the exempt income earned is to be treated as expenditure for disallowance under Section 14A ? and ii. Whether, under the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right and justified in holding that Rule 8D is not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... binding decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Brakes India Ltd. [96 DTR 281] and CRI Pumps (P) Ltd. [34 Taxmann.com 123]? and iv. Whether the order of the Tribunal contradicting the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Brakes India Ltd. [96 DTR 281] on the same question of law, makes it perverse in the eyes of law ? 3. We have heard Mr.T.R.Senthilkumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the Revenue and Mr.Venkatanarayanan, learned counsel appearing on behalf of M/s.Subbaraya Aiyer Padmanabhan, learned counsel on record for the respondent - assessee. 4. One of the substantial questions of law, which arises for consideration in TCA.No.380 of 2019, is with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s issue has been decided against the Revenue in several cases and admittedly, the assessments in question are prior to 2008-09. Therefore, these questions have to be necessarily decided against the Revenue and accordingly, they are answered against the Revenue. 8. For the assessment year 2008-09, the other questions involved are with regard to the claim for additional depreciation and as to whether the Tribunal was right in holding that additional depreciation can be allowed in an assessment year other than the assessment year, in which, the new plant and machinery were acquired and installed. The Revenue does not dispute the position that those issues were considered and decided against the Revenue in the decision in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
