9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (3) TMI 531X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Decided against revenue. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - disallowance of interest and administrative expenses - HELD THAT:- Undeniably, the interest income shown by the assessee exceeds the total amount of interest expenses therefore, no disallowance of interest expense is warranted. Regarding the administrative expense we note that the assessee has not given any explanation why such expenses should not be disallowed. Admittedly, assessee earned exempted income not chargeable to tax and therefore the expenses incurred by the assessee against such exempt income cannot be allowed while calculating the income chargeable to tax. The primary onus lies with the assessee to demonstrate that no administrative expense has been incurred by the assessee. However, from the order of the authorities below, we find that such an onus has not been discharged by the assessee. Therefore, administrative expense against the exempted income needs to be worked out under the provisions of rule 8D of Income Tax Rules in the absence of any justification from the assessee. Accordingly, we confirmed the disallowance only representing the disallowance of administrative expense as made by the AO. Hence, grou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssee which has been decided by the ITAT in favour of the assessee vide order dated 27/10/2016. The relevant extract of the order is reproduced as under: We have carefully considered the rival submission and assessment order as well as the order of the CIT(A) appeal against and also various documents and referred to at the time of hearing and case laws cited. The common issue that transcends in all the present appeals is whether gains arising on sale of land and other properties by the assessee in the relevant assessment years is required to be taxed under the head capital gains as offered by the assessee or is to be treated as business income of the assessee. The issue involved is essentially factual in nature. It is the case of the assessee that the land and other properties were no correction and acquired/purchased over several years and held as capital asset in the nature of investment. From the written submissions of the assessee as extracted by the CIT(A) in his order, we note that there a considerable time lag between the purchase and the sale of land and other properties. Simultaneously, the land/properties have been declared as capital investment by the assessee all along. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nality. At this juncture, we have also carefully perused the order of the Coordinate Bench of Tribunal in assessee's own case for AY 2006-07 where adverse view has been taken. However, we take note of the fact that the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in the matter for AY 2006- 07 has taken a different view in departure with the earlier order of the Coordinate Bench relevant to Asstt. Year 2004-05 mainly on the premise that the agricultural income has not been declared on the agricultural land held in that year. As pointed out on behalf of the assessee, agricultural income has been duly reported in all assessment years except AY 2006-07. Therefore, the facts prevailing in the captioned appeals are proximate with AY 2004-05 where the facts are found to be on same pedestal and distinguishable qua AY 2006-07. Thus, the facts prevailing in AY 2007- 08 are somewhat different. Therefore, respectfully following the decision of the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in AY 2004-05 and having regard to the totality of the facts and circumstances noted above, we find considerable merit in the plea of the assessee. We accordingly hold that land/properties were held by the assessee as capital ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing sec. 14A r.w rule D. The AO had disallowed certain sum of interest paid to depositors on the ground that the deposits were utilised for giving loans and advances to the family members without charging any interest Therein. The appellant has given a table showing that the amounts were invested in Partnership firms and from the same it had carried interest amounting to Rs. 27,51,244/- It has also earned interest of Rs. 3,16,677/- from the bank which is reflected in the computation of income. Thus, total interest income was Rs. 30,67,921/- against which interest paid was Rs. 22,60,711/- Further the appellant submitted that it had invested Rs. 3,18,02,876/-in fixed assets out of which rental income of Rs. 70,15,658/- was earned. Thus, total investment in firms and immovable properties comes out to be Rs. 5,64,19,912/- against which interest bearing lean taken is Rs. 1,88,39,258/-. Thus, he questioned the addition made by the AO. 10.3.1 There is merit in the argument of the appellant, he has earned more interest than he has paid Further, the amount of interest-bearing loan is much lower than the investments from which income is earned. Hence, there was no justification for the disal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ised by the Revenue in its grounds of appeal for the AY 2015-16 is identical to the issue raised by the Revenue in ITA No. 729/Ahd/2023 for the assessment year 2014-15. Therefore, the findings given in 729/Ahd/2023 for the AY 2014-15 shall also be applicable for the year under consideration i.e. AY 2015-16. The ground appeal of the Revenue for the assessment 2014-15 has been decided by us vide paragraph No.7 of this order against the Revenue. The learned AR and the DR also agreed that whatever will be the findings for the assessment year 2014-15 shall also be applied for the year under consideration i.e. AY 2015-16. Hence, the ground of appeal filed by the Revenue is hereby dismissed. 17. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed. Coming to ITA No. 719/Ahd/2023 an appeal by the Revenue for A.Y. 2016-17. 18. The solitary issue raised by the revenue in the grounds of appeal is that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in treating the income disclosed by the assessee as the income under the head capital gain against the finding of the AO and thereby directing the AO to allow the exemption u/s 54F of the Act, after verification. 19. At the outset, we note that the issue raised by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
