9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 345X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act, 1961 r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 in respect of investment made in securities when no direct or indirect expenditure in relation to investment in securities has been claimed or debited in the Profit and Loss Account by the appellant. (b) In disallowing Rs. 5,26,256/- u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 r.w. Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 when no proximate nexus has been established between the expenditure claimed and exempt income by the AO. (c) In ignoring the fact that the expenditure incurred and claimed by the appellant has direct nexus with the professional income of the appellant and none of the expenditure claimed by the assessee is in relation to the exempt income." 2. Briefly stated facts are that t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s the depreciation, need of a Computer Operator electricity expenses, Office premises, fees charged by Mutual Fund Agents, Portfolio record management etc. Hence, AO disallowed Rs. 5,25,256/- under rule 8D(2)(iii). 3. Aggrieved with the above, the assessee preferred appeal before Ld.CIT(A), who after considering the submissions, upheld the disallowance made by the AO. 4. Now, the assessee is in appeal before us. 5. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record and also gone through the orders of the authorities below. 5.1 At the time of hearing, Ld. AR submitted that Hon'ble ITAT, Delhi Tribunal in assessee's own case for AYrs 2009-10 and 2010-11 in ITA Nos. 554 & 5298/Del/2013 vide common order dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Sr. DR did not controvert the aforesaid proposition made by the Ld. AR, but he supported the orders of the authorities below. 5.3 At the time of hearing, it was a common point between the parties that the Grounds No. 1(a) to 1(c) involved in the captioned appeal of the Assessee are squarely covered by the common decision dated 13.3.2015 of the Coordinate Bench in assessee's own case for AYrs. 2009-10 & 2010-11 For this purpose, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Tribunal Delhi Tribunal in assessee's own case for AYrs. 2009-10 & 2010-11 passed in ITA in ITA Nos. 554 and 5298/Del/2013 vide common order dated 13.03.2015, a copy of which has been placed on record. In order to impart completeness, we may hereinafter, refer to the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the authorities below. 12. We have heard both the sides on the issue. We find that the expenditure related to the earning of exempted income like STT and brokerage were shown in the withdrawals. The assessee is also having personal drawings of Rs. 27,97,024/- for the year under consideration. All these facts show that the assessee is not debiting the expenditure related to the exempted income in its Income & Expenditure account and the revenue has failed to pinpoint any specific instance in this regard. Therefore, we allow this ground of assessee's appeal." 6. We find that the facts and circumstances are identical in the instant year as well. The Revenue has not pointed any change into facts and circumstances of the present case. We t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
