9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 123X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pany Limited [ 2017 (5) TMI 403 - SUPREME COURT ] and the same had not been considered by this Tribunal while addressing the issue in dispute. Hence, we deem it fit that this is a mistake apparent on record warranting rectification u/s. 254(2) of the Act. Since, we hold that the order deserved to be recalled on the aforesaid ground, the alternative ground raised by the assessee i.e. restricting disallowance of expenses u/s.14A of the Act to ₹ 50,000/- alone, is hereby left open in view of recalling of the order. Accordingly, the order for A.Y.2008-09 passed by this Tribunal is hereby recalled. Miscellaneous Applications preferred by the assessee are allowed. - MA No.189/Mum/2020 (Arising out of ITA No.6384/Mum/2017) And MA No.190/Mu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mary plea before the ld. AO in writing that all the expenses debited in the Income and Expenditure account were incurred only in New Delhi in connection with his professional practice carried out in New Delhi and that the investments were made long back and no expenses were incurred for the purpose of earning dividend on such investments in Mumbai. It was also specifically pointed out by the assessee that the entire dividend income has been earned by the assessee only in Mumbai. It was also submitted that the investments were managed by assessee s father stationed in Mumbai and no compensation was paid by the assessee to him for managing the investments. It was also pointed out and reiterated that there was no churning of investments or sal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ut at ₹ 22,18,870/-. 2.3. We find that the assessee had made a preliminary objection that absolutely no satisfaction was recorded by the ld. AO either in his original assessment order framed u/s.143(3) of the order or in the rectification proceedings u/s.154 of the Act. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd., vs. DCIT reported in 394 ITR 449. He drew the attention of the Bench that reliance was heavily placed on this judgement at the time of hearing, more especially to para 37,38 and 39 thereon, but this Tribunal while disposing of this appeal had not considered the same while addressing the issue in dispute. Accordingly, ld. Counsel pointed out that non-c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
