9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (10) TMI 2778X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of I.T. Rules, 1962 on account of investment of Rs. 24,47,37,681/ - observing as under:- "4.0 Disallowance on tax free investment u/s 14A rw. rule 8D: - During the assessment proceeding it was not iced that the assessee made the following investments into the equities & shares, mutual funds, growth funds etc.: - Sr. No. No. of units Particulars Amount as on 31.3.07 Amount as on 31.3.06 1. 150000 Birla FTP Retail 386 D Series U-G 15,00,000/- - 2. 10000000 LI 30 'D SBI Debt Fund Series - 90 Days - Div. 10,00,00,000/- - 3. 4019703 LI 33 D SBI Debt Fund Series- 90 Days- Div. 4,01.97,480/- - 4. 4000000 LI 36 G SBI Debt Fund Series -90 Days G 4,00,00,000/- - 5. 9787813 LO30 Magnum Insta Cash Fund- Dividend 10,45,40,201/- - 6. 100000 Principal PNB FMP S!V 385 D REG-G 10,00,000/- - 7. 250000 Reliance FH Fund Ml 371 D SIVRET-G 25,00,000/- - 8. 20000 SB! One India Fund 2,00,000/- - 9. 162882 LO57D Magnum Insta Cash Fund 15.73.766/- 4.88.250/- TOTAL 29,38,09,697/- 4,88,250/- The assessee has submit ted that the funds invested at Sr.No.1, 4, 6,7,8, 9 and the opening balance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al assets as appearing in the balance sheet of the assessee, on the first day and the last day of the previous year; (iii) an amount equal to one-half per cent of the average of the value of investment, income from which does not or shall not form part of the total income, as appearing in the balance sheet of the assesses, on the first day and the last day of the previous year." The assessee vide order sheet entry dated 20.11-09 was asked that there were total investments of Rs. 29,38,09,697/- as on 31.03.2007 and as per assessee, Rs. 24,47,37,6817- are investments on which dividend income is not taxable. The calculation under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D is as follows:- Opening Investments as on 01.04.06 0 Closing investments as on 31.03.07 244737681 Total 244737681 Average 122368841 Interest Paid 21962710 Average Assets Opening Assets as on 01.04.06 175298442 Closing Assets as on 31.03.07 1622163023 1797461465 Average 898730733 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Assessing Officer can adopt a reason-able basis for effecting the apportionment. While making that determination, the Assessing Officer should provide a reasonable opportunity to the assessee of producing its accounts and relevant or germane material having a bearing on the facts and circumstances of the case." In view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court, we set aside the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue and remand the matter to CIT(A) with the direct ion to decide the same afresh keeping in view the observations of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing. Co. Ltd Vs. DCIT (supra). The CIT(A) shall provide an opportunity of being heard to the assessee in the matter. For statistical purposes, the ground No.1 of the appeal is allowed. 6. Ground Nos. 2, 3 & 4 of the appeal reads as under :- 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law in deleting the addition made by the A.O. amounting to Rs. 29,43,718/- by disallowing the claim of the assessee u/s 80IC on job work whereas income from job charges cannot be treated to have been derived by the undertaking by manufacturing or producing any article or thing not pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Re: Mrs. Sector Food Specialties Ltd, Ludhiana vs. Addll, CIT, Ludhiana Sub: - Application for condonation of Delay in fi ling the appeal. Sir, The appellant humbly submits as under:- 1. That the appeal filed by the revenue bearing no. 1063/2011 is fixed before the Hon'ble Bench for today i.e. 25.03.2014. 2. That the appellant is filling appeal against the order of CIT(A)- II dated 08.08.2011 which is late by 950 days as the order of the CIT(A)-II was received on 18.08.2011. 3. That the delay in filing the appeal has occurred as the claim for exempt ion of dividend income of Rs. 53,11,447/- (Wrongly mentioned at Rs. 20,19,367/- ) was made before the AO which the AO did not deal with in the assessment order. 4. That since there was no specific finding by the AO in the assessment order the appellant by an oversight did not take up the issue in appeal before the learned CIT(A)- II 5. That this innocent mistake had also occurred on the part of our Chartered Accountant who drafted the grounds of appeal before CIT(A)- II . 6. That appeal was not filed before the Hon'ble Tribunal because the issue was again not specifically deal t with by the C!T(A)- II ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee is that it had claimed exempt ion in respect of dividend income of Rs. 53,11,447/- (wrongly mentioned as 20,19,367/- ) in the writ ten submissions filed before the Assessing officer as well as CIT(A) , which exempt ion by an oversight was not claimed in the return of income. In the Affidavit , Sh. Subhash Aggarwal submitted that since the issue regarding dividend income was not specifically dealt with by the lower authorities and the CIT(A) had decided all the other issues in favour of the assessee, he inadvertently did not advise his client to file an appeal before the Tribunal. It is apparent from the order of the CIT(A) that assessee earned dividend income of Rs. 53,11,447/- which was claimed exempt u/s 10(34) & 10(35) of the Act, during the course of assessment proceedings. It was shown as taxable in the return of income as the assessment has been made u/s 115JB, it did not affect any taxability of the income. Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the present case, we are satisfied that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the present appeal. At the same time, it is also well settled law that length of delay is not to matter in the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
