9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (12) TMI 750X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t ground no. 1 raised by the revenue may be dismissed. 5. The ld DR on the other hand fairy agreed that the issue is covered in assesse's own case but relied on the ground of appeal. 6. After perusing the facts of the assesse case and order of coordinate bench in AY 2011-12 as stated above we find that identical issue has been decided vide para no. 3 to 6 in ITA No. 4943/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2011-12 & others. Following the said decision of the coordinate bench we inclined to uphold the order of CIT(A) by dismissing the ground no.1 of revenue appeal. 7. The issue raised in ground no. 2 is against the order of ld. CIT(A) deleting the addition as made by the AO on account of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of ₹ 3,60,92,087/-. 8. At the outset, the ld Counsel of the assesse submitted issue is fully covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in assesse own case in ITA No. 4943/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2011-12 & others and prayed that ground no. 2 raised by the revenue may be dismissed. The ld DR on the other hand fairy agreed that the issue is covered in assessee's own case but relied on the ground of appeal. 9. After perusing the facts of the assesse case and order of coordinate bench in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... curities. We note that assesse own funds were ₹ 512.65 Cr whereas the investments in tax free securities were 17.27 Cr. The ld CIT(A) has passed the order after following the decisions of jurisdictional High Court in the case of Reliance Utilities Ltd Vs CIT(Supra) and HDFC Bank Ltd. (supra).Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the order of ld CIT(A) and accordingly the ground no. 4 is dismissed by upholding the order of ld CIT(A) on this issue. 18. The issue raised in ground no. 5 is against the order of ld. CIT(A) allowing the depreciation in respect of unrealized foreign exchange loss. 19. At the outset, the ld Counsel of the assesse submitted issue is fully covered by the decision of the coordinate bench in assesse own case in ITA No. 4943/Mum/2017 A.Y. 2011-12 & others and prayed that ground no. 5 raised by the revenue may be dismissed. 20. The ld DR on the other hand fairy agreed that the issue is covered in assessee's own case but relied on the ground of appeal. 21. After perusing the facts of the assesse case and order of coordinate bench in AY 2011-12 as stated above we find that identical issue has been decided vide para no. 15 to 17 in ITA No. 4943/Mum/20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 3 is against the order of ld CIT(A) upholding the disallowance as made u/s 14A of the Act r.w.r 8D(2)(iii). 32. The ld AR submitted before the bench the issue is fully covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the coordinate bench in assesse own case in ITA No. 4398/Mum/2016 AY 2010-11 wherein the coordinate bench has held in para 7 that for the purpose of disallowance u/s 8(2)(D)(iii) only those investments are to be taken which have yielded exempt income during the year. 33. We have perused the facts on records and also the decision of the coordinate bench in ITA No. 4398/Mum/2016 AY 2010-11 wherein the coordinate bench has held in para 7 that for the purpose of disallowance u/s 8(2)(D)(iii) only those investments are to be taken which have yielded exempt income during the year. Following the decision of the coordinate bench we set aside the order ld CIT(A) and allow ground no. 3. 34. The issue raised in ground no 4 is not pressed and is accordingly dismissed as not pressed. 35. The issue raised in ground no. 5 is against the order of ld CIT(A) not allowing the deduction of u/s 80-IA in respect of profits and gains derived from undertaking engaged in generation o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no.6 in ITA No.7126/Mum/2017AY2012-13 would mutatis mutandis apply to this ground as well. The ground no.4 in revenue appeal is dismissed. 44. The appeal of the revenue is dismissed. CO No.25/Mum/2019 45. The ground no.1 of the cross objection filed by the assessee is similar to ground no. 1 in CO:24/Mum/2018 AY 2012-13. Therefore our decision on ground no. 1 in CO:24/Mum/2018 AY 2012-13 would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this ground as well. The ground no.1 is allowed. 46. The ground no. 2 of the cross objection filed by the assessee is similar to ground no. 3 in CO:24/Mum/2018 AY 2012-13. Therefore our decision on ground no. 3 in CO:24/Mum/2018 AY 2012-13 would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this ground as well. The ground no.2 is allowed for statistical purpose. 47. The ground no. 3 of the cross objection filed by the assessee is similar to ground no. 5 in CO:24/Mum/2018 AY 2012-13. Therefore our decision on ground no. 5 in CO:24/Mum/2018 AY 2012-13 would, mutatis mutandis, apply to this ground as well. The ground no. 3 is allowed for statistical purpose. 48. The ground no.4 of the cross objection filed by the assessee is similar to ground no. 6 in CO No.24/Mum/2018 AY 2012-13 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
