9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1782X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) was wholly wrong and unjustified in not deleting the arbitrary and baseless disallowance of expenses of Rs. 8,81,839/- u/s. 14A of the Act/ Rule 8D(2)(i)(ii) & (iii) of the I. Tax Rules made in the assessment against the small dividend income of Rs. 72,000/- earned on shares entirely held as stock-in-trade in business in respect of which Rule 8D(2) is not applicable. 2. For that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was wholly wrong and unjustified in issuing a direction to the AO, based on a judgment of the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata in the case of Teenlok Advisory Services (P) Ltd. to recalculate the disallowance of expenses by considering only those shares whether held as "Investment" or as "S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rcumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was wholly wrong and unjustified in not considering the facts that no satisfactory note was recorded by the AO to justify the applicability of Section 14A/Rule 8D(2) for disallowing any expense against the exempt dividend income incidentally received on trading shares. 6. For that in view of the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. CIT(A) was wholly wrong and unjustified in upholding the AO's decision that the loss of Rs. 19,02,678/- suffered in the share trading business was a deemed speculation loss in terms of the Explanation to Section 73 of the Act without considering the facts that the assessee being a RBI registered NBFC carrying on the business of granting loans and ad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... during the year under consideration being only Rs. 72,000/-, the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D on account of expenses incurred in relation to the said exempt income cannot exceed Rs. 72,000/- being the amount of dividend income actually earned. Since this issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Limited -vs.- CIT (372 ITR 694), wherein it was held that the disallowance under section 14A cannot exceed the actual amount of exempt income earned by the assessee, we allow the limited relief claimed on behalf of the assessee and restrict the disallowance of Rs. 8,81,839/- made under section 14A read with Rule 8D to Rs. 72,000/-. 4. In the result, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
