9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he statement recorded u/s. 132(4) does not constitute incriminating material even though the statement is based on the substantial evidence of transactions appearing in the books of account of assessee duly corroborated by the statements of various persons. 2 "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P.R. Metrani v. CIT[2006] 287 ITR 209/157 Taxman 325 (SC) wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held that the books of account, documents, money, bullion, jewellery or other valuable article or thing and any statements recorded of the persons searched may be used as evidence for any proceedings under the Act." 3 "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the ledger account and other documents found during the search proceedings do not constitute incriminating material." 3. Since the facts and issues are involved in both the years are exactly same including the finding of the ld. AO and ld. CIT (A), therefore, both these appeals are taken simultaneously. In the cross objection, assessee has raised the issue on merits of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t in WEPL in the hands of the assessee and he noted that assessee has received funds from Kolkata based companies in A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15 in the following manner:- 2013-14 Sr. No. Name Nature Amount(in Rs. ) 1 Marina Commercial Pvt. Ltd. Share Capital 37,55,00,000 2 Rashidhan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. Share Capital 2,54,00,000 Total 39,79,50,000 2014-15 Sr. No. Name Nature Amount(in Rs. ) 1 Marina Commercial Pvt. Ltd. Share Capital 5,83,00,000 Total 5,83,00,000 7. The ld. AO has also analysed various percentage of shareholding in M/s. WEPL by various companies and different layers of subsidiaries and investor companies. Thereafter, in his order he has referred to certain enquiries on the premises of Kolkata based company, the details of such companies have been elaborated at page 8 which included the above two companies, that is, Marina Commercial Pvt. Ltd. and Rashidhan Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd, from whom assessee has received share capital. In the field enquiries before search it was found that the Inspector has submitted a report wherein at the time of enquiry, it was informed that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AO has passed assessment order u/s. 153A and has made addition in absence of any incriminating material found in the course of search. Further during the course of search which continued for four days, no incriminating material whatsoever was found on the share application money or any documents that assessee has taken any accommodation entry. The entire assessment has been passed on the basis of pre-search information and post-search enquiry which was unconnected with the assessee company. Before the ld. CIT (A) assessee has also summarized various findings of the ld. AO wherein certain statements and field enquiries and inspector reports etc. have been referred which was conducted before the search and post search and nothing was connected with share application received by the assessee was found during the course of the search. The same has been tabulated in the following manner:- Sr No. Nature of finding Remarks 1. Inspector report dated 25.08.2017 Post search enquiries conducted by investigation wing without any reference to any incriminating material 2. Statement of Saroj Swaika and Renu Swaika u/s 131 dated 30.06.2017 at DDIT(lnv.) office Third party statemen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... und at the premises of the assessee has been made. Even in the statement recorded, as referred by the ld. AO, was made much prior to the date of commencement of the search in the case of the assessee. In so far as the statement of promoter and employees at the premises of the assessee there is no whisper or any admission regarding the receipt of any accommodation entry and no co-relation with any material found during the search. Even in the statement of Shri Vineet Mittal, Promoter of the group recorded u/s. 132(4), nowhere, he has admitted or stated about any cash credit received in the books of the assessee company as bogus or non-genuine. The entire submissions of the assessee including on merits have been incorporated in the appellate order right from pages 5-77 of the appellate order. 10. The assessee's submissions were forwarded to the ld. AO specifically to rebut the submissions, whether there was any incriminating material found during the course of search in the case of the assessee or. In the remand report of the ld. AO dated 05/07/2022, ld. AO stated that the expression "incriminating evidence" has not been defined in the Income Tax Act. Incriminating material can be i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de. The findings of the AO in the assessment order and remand report based on which the addition has been made can be summarized as under 1 Reliance on statement of promoter and employees of the appellant group. 2 Reliance on statement of third parties recorded at the DDIT office prior to the search action on the appellant. 3. Reliance on the statement of third parties recorded at the DDIT office during and post the search action conducted at the premises of the appellant 4. Reliance on the report of the inspector conducted post search action on the appellant 5. Reliance on the documents seized during the search proceedings 9.7 Before coming to the findings of the AO, it is necessary to consider as to what constitutes an incriminating material. Though the said term has not been defined in the Act, incriminating material may also comprise of document or evidence found in search which demonstrates or proves that what is apparent is not real or what is real is not apparent. The nature of the evidence or information gathered during the search should be of such nature that it should not merely raise doubt or suspicion but should be of such nature which would prima facie show ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... search action and having come to light during the search action, has the potential of affecting determination of income tax of the persons affected by information. If the information pertains to searched person, he is assessed under section 153A and if the information is in respect of a party not covered by search his case is covered under section 153G of the Act 9.8 It is seen that the AO has heavily relied on the statements recorded during the course of the search of various persons and categorized these statements an incriminating material However, what is important here to see is that whether these statements are suitably corroborated by supporting evidence and material found during the course of the search as the Hon'ble Courts have held in a number of decisions that statements recorded us 132(4) could be treated as incriminating material only when supported by corroborative evidence. 9.8.1 In this regard, reliance is placed on Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Anand Jain in ITA No. 23/2021 dated 12.02.2021 wherein the court rejected to consider the statement recorded u/s 132(4) as incriminating material since it was not supported by any corroborative evidence. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pted, if would result in ignoring an important check on the power of the AO and would expose assessee is arbitrary assessments based only on the statements, which we are conscious are sometimes extracted by exerting undue influence or by coercion Sometimes statements are recorded by officers in circumstances which can most charitably be described as oppressive and in most such cases, are subsequently retracted Therefore, it is necessary to ensure that such statements, which are retracted subsequently, do not form the sole basis for computing undisclosed income of an assessee. 9.9 The appellant has on the other hand vigorously argued that since no corroborative material was found in its case during the course of the search, the statements relied upon by the AO could not be considered as incriminating material. 9.10 As already stated above the assessment order and remand report, AO has referred to the statements of the promoter and various employees of group companies recorded during the search 9.11 AO has contended that Mr. Mridul Gehlot who was director in certain companies before its amalgamation with the assessee, has accepted that no actual work was done by him. I find tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... onse to summon dated 27.07.2017 wherein all the documents/evidences related to share application money have been submitted The copy of the said reply has been submitted by the assessee. Further Mr. Mittal in his statement has categorically stated that the employees were appointed as directors based on the Merits. No doubt whatsoever has been raised by the AO on the documents submitted by the assessee. 9.16 Accordingly. I find that no incriminating fact has been brought out from the statements recorded by the promoter and employees of the assessee group during the course of search which is corroborated by other incriminating material/evidence gathered during the course of the search Moreover, it is also seen that only the statement of the promoter has been recorded u/s 132(4), while the statement of the employees have been recorded u/s 131 of the Act. 9.17 Secondly, the AO has relied upon certain statements recorded of entry providers who were engaged in the business of providing accommodation entries before the Investigation wing in the year 2014 As per AO, funds were routed through the companies operated by such persons into the companies from whom funds were received to the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing premium and that he had been informed by Mr. Satish Sharma that it was an accommodation entry 9.19.1 In this regard, I find that Mr. Mehta has expressed his opinion that premium charged by the said company was on the higher side and he had been informed by Mr. Satish Sharma that it was an accommodation entry Here it is important to note that on being enquired with respect to the persons/ operators who would have arranged such transaction, he responded that he was not aware of the same and simply claimed that Mr. Satish Sharma and Amod Despandhe knew the facts. On perusal of such statement, it is inferred that Mr. Mehta had no concrete knowledge as to whether the company had received any accommodation entry his statement was merely on basis of word of mouth with no factual information 919.2 The assessee has further pointed out that though the statement of Mr Mehta was recorded 30.06.2017, statement of Shri Satish Sharma was also recorded on 02.07 2017 However, no such cross verification or admission has been made by Shri Satish Sharma in his impugned statement which, according to the assessee, showed that the search officials were also not satisfied with the statement given ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Section 132(4) is accepted, it would result in ignoring an important check on the power of the AO and would expose assessees to arbitrary assessments based only on the statements, which we are conscious are sometimes extracted by exerting undue influence or by coercion. Sometimes statements are recorded by officers in circumstances which can most charitably be described as oppressive and in most such cases, are subsequently retracted therefore, it is necessary to ensure that such statements, which are retracted subsequently to not form the sole basis for computing undisclosed income of an assessee. 9.20.2 Similar decision has been rendered by Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs Best Infrastructure Private Limited, 397 ITR 82 wherein it was held as under 38. Fifthly, statements recorded under Section 132 (4) of the Act of the Act do not by themselves constitute incriminating material as has been explained by this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Hajeev Aggarwal (supra) Lastly, as already pointed out hereinbefore, the facts in the present case arm different from the facts in Smt. Dayawanti Gupta v CIT (supra) where the admission by the Assessees themselves on critical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en submitted vide letter dated 26 07 2022. In its rejoinder that the assessee has submitted that the documents relied upon by the AO, are part of the accounted books in the form of ledger accounts share application forms, bank statements, etc Page wise explanation for the same has been submitted by the assessee in the rejoinder 9.22.1 I have gone through the copies of the ledgers, share application forms and bank statements forming part of the seized material which have been provided by the AO and explanation for the same furnished by the appellant. It is noted that the relevant seized maternal are only supporting documents pertaining to the accounted transactions being receipt of share capital in the form of ledgers accounts, cheque receipt vouchers, bank statements share application forms etc., which would support the accounting for share application money received. The appellant has also pointed out that the details in respect of the share application money along with the supporting documents were also duly provided to the then AO at the time of completion of the original assessment in its case vide letter dated 11.07.2016 Such supporting documents, therefore, do not bring out ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ental Warehousing Corporation (Nhava Sheva) Ltd. [2015] 58 taxmann.com 78 and also the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell P Ltd [2023] 149 taxmann.com 399, completed assessment cannot be interfered while making an assessment u/s 153A of the Act unless such interference is on the basis of incriminating material gathered during the course of the search, which is not the case here. Thus, Ground No. 2 is allowed and the addition made is directed to be deleted. 12. We have heard both the parties at length, perused the relevant finding given in the impugned orders as well as materials referred to before us including the remand report of the ld. AO and rejoinder submissions made by the assessee. The entire issue which has been challenged before us by the revenue, whether there was any incriminating material for the purpose of making the assessment and addition u/s. 68 for the A.Y. 2013-14 and 2014-15 or not. The department's case is that the information gathered during pre-search enquiry and post-search enquiry which revealed that; firstly, the share application money received by the assessee company were not genuine for the reason that these entities were not ava ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iminating material. 3 Statement of Rajcsh Bhuthoria u/s 131 dated 14.11.2014 at ADlTdnv.) office, Kolkata Pre search enquiries conducted by investigation wing, Kolkata, on certain entry providers. These entry operators were engaged in providing accommodation entries through various entities. It is also alleged that such entities have provided accommodation entries to the shareholders companies of the assessee company from whom share capital has been received by the assessee. Statements were recorded much prior to search action and have no link with the assessee. There is no mention of the assessee company's name or its shareholders. Therefore, such independent statement cannot be termed as incriminating material unearthed from the search on the assessee company. Statements themselves cannot be treated as incriminating material, if nothing adverse has been sated against the assessee. Findings / Enquiries during the course of search at the premises of the assessee 4 Statement of employee Shri Mrudul Kumar Gehlot u/s 131 dated 01.07.2017 Shri Mrudul Kumar Gehlot in his statement has confirmed that he was appointed as director as per the instruction of Shri Vineet an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 39;lie search which can create a doubt on the veracity of the share capital received. Important to note that the seized documents should be such which should clearly cast a doubt on the transaction, without a second guess. Otherwise, department was free to reopen the case with the findings which it already had prior to search. Enquiries during the course of search at third parties 7 Statement of Shri S.G. Mehta u/s 132(4) dated 30.06.2017 at his own office premises Mr. Mehta in his statement stated that he did not find any rational behind charging high premium from Luxury Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. He also stated that he was informed by Mr. Salish Sharma, employee of the assessee group that the share capital received from Luxury Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. was an accommodation entry. He also slated there was a possibility that the other share capital received by the group was also not genuine whose details were available with Mr. Satish Sharma or Mr. Amol Despande. Mr. Mehta is not related to the assessee group and was an erstwhile tax consultant to M/s. Luxury Vinimay Pvt. Ltd. Entire allegation in the statement of Mr. Mehta is related to share capital received from M/s. Luxury Vinimay Pvt. L ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f non-existence. Also, the said shareholder companies had already merged and therefore, it was possible that said exdirectors had changed addresses. Post Search Inquiries 10 Inspector report dated 25.08.2017 relating to shareholder companies The enquiries were made by the Inspector at the Kolkata address of the shareholder companies. The Inspector report states that the companies were not existing at the given address/premises. These Companies had been merged much prior to the search action and therefore, their existence at the time of search was legally not there. The findings/inspector report cannot by itself be termed as incriminating since the same do not arise from the search action at the appellant. The shareholder companies namely M/s Marina Commercial Pvt. Ltd. and M/s. Nimbus Dealers Pvt. Ltd. were assessed u/s 143(3) in earlier period at the same address wherein the notices issued by department were duly served and assessed. Therefore, the allegation of department is not correct and contradictory. 11 Statement recorded of Shri Rajesh Kumar Bhutoria and Naresh Kumar Chhaparia u/s 131 dated 24.08.2017 at DDIT(Inv.) office, Kolkata Statement recorded u/s 131 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng leading to some kind of inference that the credits which had come up in the form of share application money are bogus or non-genuine. Thus statement also does not lead to inference of any incriminating material. 14.1 One very important fact which has also been highlighted by the ld. DR and also by the ld. AO in his remand report that there was a ledger account pertaining to share application which was found at the time of search which can been treated as incriminating material. First of all this, is the part of ledger account forming part of regular books of accounts of the assessee and it is only supporting document that assessee has received share application money in the books duly supported by the share application forms, bank receipts, vouchers and bank statements which was already subject to scrutiny during the original assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) and was also produced before the ld. AO at that time. Further, these are part of regular books of accounts which had been duly disclosed and scrutinized in the first round of assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3). Hence, books of accounts which have already been scrutinized cannot be treated as incriminating material found du ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... search is a very foundation of acquiring jurisdiction u/s 153A in the case of unabated / completed assessment. This principle laid down by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and Hon'ble Delhi High Court and various other High Courts have been reaffirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abhisar Buildwell Pvt.ltd reported in 454 ITR 212 wherein Lordships have concluded and stated as under:- "13. For the reasons stated hereinabove, we are in complete agreement with the view taken by the Delhi High Court in the case of Kabul Chawla (supra) and the Gujarat High Court in the case of Saumya Construction (supra) and the decisions of the other High Courts taking the view that no addition can be made in respect of the completed assessments in absence of any incriminating material. 14. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, it is concluded as under: (i) that in case of search under section 132 or requisition under section 132A, the AO assumes the jurisdiction for block assessment under section 153A; (ii) all pending assessments/reassessments shall stand abated; (iii) in case any incriminating material is found/unearthed, even, in case of unabated/completed asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt in the case of Param Dairy Ltd. in ITA No.37 of 2021 dated 15/02/2021, wherein it has been held that audit report, cash book, ledger book, bank book and the books of accounts maintained regularly by the assessee if it has been seized and found during the course of search cannot be treated as incriminating material because regular books of accounts by no stretch of imagination could be treated as incriminating material form basis of framing assessment u/s. 153A. Here in this case same very books of account and ledger have been subject matter of scrutiny in assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) much prior to the date of search as noted above. Thus, on the facts and circumstances of the case and the principle of law as laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court which has been followed by the ld. CIT (A) as incorporated above is upheld. Accordingly, grounds raised by the Revenue are dismissed. 21. Since we upheld the order of the ld. CIT (A), the issue on merits has raised by the assessee in the cross objection for both the assessment years have become purely academic and same is dismissed as infructuous. A.Y. 2016-17 22. In this year The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... served that assessee did not furnish any response to show-cause notice and accordingly, assessee has failed to establish the creditworthiness of assessee M/s. Integral Distributors LLP for advancing such a huge loan. Accordingly, he upheld the addition u/s. 68 for Rs. 28 Crores. 24. During the course of the appellate proceedings, the assessee filed detailed submissions as well as additional evidences running into 296 pages which related to M/s. Integral Distributors Pvt. Ltd. Thus, additional evidences were forwarded to the Assessing Officer to examine and to give his report. The comment of the ld. AO has been dealt and incorporated in the appellate order. The relevant extract of ld. AO's comment in the remand report is as under:- "4.1 The AO has made the following additions to the income declared in the return of income filed against notice issued under section 153A of the Act: a. Disallowance under section 14A- Rs. 8,49,459/- b. Difference in 26AS- unreconciled amount Rs. 4,01,299 c. Unexplained cash credit u/s 68-Rs. 28,00,00,000/- During the assessment the documents which were produced before the AO are: Ledger confirmation from the M/s Integral Distributors LLP, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... available on MCA website 4.5 The other evidence provided by the assessee is the bank account statement and financial statement of the above-mentioned entities. The bank statements clearly show that the funds were received from other parties and then transferred through banking channel to the lender. Certain observations derived from the account statements are as follows- a. There are some common companies whose names appear multiple times in the bank account statements provided, such as, Allmost Tradelink Pvt. Limited, Bhumilaxmi Distributors Pvt. Ltd, Finelink Suppliers Pvt. Ltd, Subhlabh Fiscal Services Private Limited, Everrise Commotrade Pvt. Ltd., Moonstar Commodities Pvt. Limited etc. The first and second are at present struck off by RoC Kolkata. Whether the funds were received in lieu of sale of shares cannot be confirmed from these documents. b. The shares bought by these companies were sold within the same financial year, st par with purchase value. Hence, there is no declaration of STCL/STCO in the ITR. c. The common features of these entities can be summarised as follows: Their entire Investments lie in unquoted shares of private limited companies from which n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, duly recorded in the books of accounts of the assessee and duly reflected in the financial statements of the assessee. Also, the assessee has also explained that the said loan has been taken for the commercial purpose of investment in Welspun group for energy business and the same was repaid in subsequent period before the search action. Further, the creditworthiness or financial strength of the lender is proved from the bank statement of the lender wherein it is observed that it had sufficient balance in its accounts to enable it to advance the unsecured loans. Also, the lender had sufficient own funds of Rs. 91 Croreright from AY 2012-13 out of which the loan of Rs. 28 Crore has been advanced to the assessee. The assessee has also pointed out that the source in the hands of the lender was also assessed by the AO wherein the funds were verified by the then AO and accepted as genuine in AY 2012-13 itself. 14.21 In the assessment order, AO has stated that the lender and its shareholders were not found at the address at Kolkata. In the appellate proceedings, the assessee has explained that the address of the lender was changed to Mumbai and therefore, the verification at the old ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st place to substantiate the "source of the source" in the case of the loan transaction for the relevant assessment year. However, according to the assessee, while not being legally bound to do so, it has still explained the source of the source as well. 14.26 I have gone through the remand report and the rejoinder of the assessee. AO has mentioned that the shares have been purchased and sold in the same year and no capital gain have been earned on the same and so no capital gain has been shown in the ITR. I find that the decision of purchase and sale is a prerogative of the assessee and the same cannot be rejected merely on the ground that no capital gain has been earned on the same. I find that the transaction of sale by the lender has been confirmed by the third parties. I also find that the lender was assessed by the same AO and no addition regarding the said transaction has been made by the AO in the hands of the lender entity. Accordingly, I do not find that any substance in the allegation of the AO. 14.27 Further, AO has also pointed out that the parties to whom the lender has sold the unquoted shares are inter related and share common addresses. It has also been pointed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the hands of the lender company and also accepted u/s 143(3), then no addition should be made. 26. On the other hand, ld. DR relying upon the observation of the ld. AO and the remand report and submitted that the creditworthiness of the lender company has not been established at all. Apart from that, ld. AO has pointed out that how the funds were moved through some company and entire source of funds in the hands of the lender company has not been established. Accordingly, the creditworthiness and genuineness of the source of the source of the company is doubtful. 27. We have heard rival submissions and perused the relevant finding given in the impugned order. One very important fact is that in the case of the lender company assessment has been completed u/s. 143(3) and no adverse inference has been drawn about the source of the loan given to the assessee company or it has been found to be a fictitious entity. To prove the genuineness of the transaction, the entire bank statements and financial statements of the lender company have been provided and it was also submitted that loan was taken for the purpose of investment to be made in the Welspun group for energy business and sam ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he purchase of unquoted shares and sale were also filed before the ld. AO during the remand proceedings which has been duly examined by the ld. CIT(A). Nowhere, AO has inquired about the source and veracity of the source of the funds of the lender company, albeit it has been accepted in the order passed u/s 143(3). Thus, it cannot be held that source of the source has not been proved by the assessee. Accordingly, the aforesaid finding of the ld. CIT (A) is affirmed. 29. In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. A.Y. 2017-18 30. In A.Y. 2017-18, Revenue has taken the following grounds:- 1. "i.On facts and in circumstances of the case, the Id. CIT(A) has erred in restricting disallowance made under section 14A to the extent of tax exempt income earned during the year by overlooking the clarification of legislative intent provided by the CBDT vide Circular No. 5/2014 dated 11.02.2014 and to this effect even an amendment was made by Finance Act, 2022 by way of insertion of Explanation to Section 14A". 2 ii. "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT is correct in law, in directing to delete the disallowance made u/s 14A of the Income Tax Ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that there is no exempt income earned by the assessee, then no disallowance u/s. 14A can be made. This issue stands covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s. Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and catena of other judgments of Hon'ble High Courts including Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd. reported in 95 taxmann.com 250. Further, Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd reported in (2022) 141 taxmann.com 289 held that amendment brought in Section 14A w.e.f. 01/04/2022 is not retrospective. Accordingly, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is confirmed. Similarly, disallowance u/s. 14A while computing book profit u/s. 115JB also is covered by the various decisions and including the Special Bench in the case of Vireet Investments P Ltd reported in 82 Taxmann.com 415 and Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Bhushan Steel Ltd in ITA No 593/2015, accordingly, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A while computing book profit u/s. 115JB. Accordingly, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 33. In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed as well as Cross Objections of the assesse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
