9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1634X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... elements. This in accordance with the rule held in ACB India Ltd. [ 2015 (4) TMI 224 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] For these reasons, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the ITAT under Section 14A. The first question is answered accordingly. Product development expenditure - Assessee had claimed it to be on the revenue s side - AO was of the opinion that the product in question, i.e., samples would result in something of an enduring advantage to the assessee and that it could claim 1/3rd of the expenditure for this year from the balance in the succeeding two years - CIT (A) allowed the assessee s contention and the ITAT affirmed it - HELD THAT:- As it is purely a question of fact which this Court would not interfere with. That apart the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t offered ₹ 1,72,879/- under Section 14A. The AO proceeded to calculate the disallowance by applying the formula prescribed under Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules and held that the sum of ₹ 1,45,72,152/- had to be disallowed. The assessee's appeal was partly accepted; in that the CIT (A) arrived at the figure of ₹ 18,02,231/- and disallowed that amount under Section 14A. The ITAT, however, rejected that as well and upheld the assessee's contentions with respect to the disallowance offered by it. 4. At the outset it was pointed out that the AO's rejection of the assessee's explanation was premised upon his opinion that no substantiation to the figure was offered. The assessee had relied upon Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. CI ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mation before invocation of Rule 8D. Rule 8D is itself premised upon an understanding that not the entire investment but that part of the investment which yields tax exempt income is what ought to be considered as one of the elements. This in accordance with the rule held in ACB India Ltd., v. ACIT (374 ITR 108). For these reasons, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the ITAT under Section 14A. The first question is answered accordingly. 6. So far as the issue of product development expenditure is concerned, the assessee had claimed it to be on the revenue's side to the extent of ₹ 11.87 crores. The AO was of the opinion that the product in question, i.e., samples would result in something of an enduring advantage to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
