9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (8) TMI 1401X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ellaneous Application, the assessee seeks to recall the order passed by this Tribunal on two counts:- (a) Non adjudication of additional ground of appeal with regard to disallowance of interest u/s 14A of the Act rw second limb of Rule 8D(2) of the Rules (b) Non adjudication of original ground raised by the assesee with regard allowability of provision made for leave salary. 2. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials available on record. With regard to the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, we find that the assessee had raised original ground before us with regard to disallowance of administrative expenses made under third limb of Rule 80(2) of the Rules. This Tribunal had adjudicated this origina ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al had not adjudicated the original contention of the assessee raised in the original ground that this provision for leave salary is allowable as deduction, on the premise that "any sum payable mentioned in section Clause (f) of section 43B is independent of any sum payable" as defined for the purpose of Clause (a) of section 438 in accordance with the provisions of Explanation (2) of section 438. The Ld. AR pointed out that this issue is already decided in favour of assessee in earlier year in assessee's own case, which order was also cited by the Ld.AR at the time of hearing of the original appeal, but had apparently missed the attention of the Bench by inadvertence, while disposing off the appeal. When this was put to Ld. DR, the Ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... towards administrative expenses, the ld. CIT(A) restricted the same to 11.93 Crores as detailed supra. The issue which has to be decided by us also is only with regard to disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the rules for which purpose, the availability of own funds with the assessee company has got no relevance, hence, the argument made by the ld. AR in that regard and reliance placed by him on certain decisions need not be adjudicated at all. We find that a Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investments reported in 165 ITD 27 had held that only those investments which had yielded exempt income should be considered for the purpose of working out the disallowance under rule 8D(2) of the rules. Accordingly, we direc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... g investment and therefore, no disallowance should be made. We find that this precise issue was taken in A.Y. 2010-11 wherein the Tribunal has remanded back this issue to examine if assessee had surplus interest free funds far exceeding the investment made which has yielded exempt income, then no disallowance under Rule 8D(2) should be made. Accordingly, this issue of disallowance of interest under Rule 8D (2) is remanded back to the file of ld. AO to decide this issue afresh even though assessee might have suo-moto offered disallowance which now has been claimed that no disallowance should be made in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of South Indian Bank Ltd reported in 438 ITR 1 (SC), wherein Hon'ble Supreme Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
