9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (9) TMI 1200X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arise from the impugned order of the Tribunal wherein, the Tribunal has followed the decision for its earlier year. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - foreign investment made by the assessee - HELD THAT:- As decided in SUZLON ENERGY LTD. [ 2013 (7) TMI 697 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] CIT(A) had directed exclusion of foreign investment made for the purpose of computation of disallowance us. 14A as per Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules 1962 holding that the dividend earned from the said foreign investment was not exempt from tax. No substantial question of law arises from the impugned order of the Tribunal. - HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BHARGAV D. KARIA AND HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE NIRAL R. MEHTA Appearance: For the Appellant(s) No. 1: Mrs Kalpana K Raval ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . (i) pertaining to the deletion of addition on account of the receipt of CER and treating the same as Capital Receipt instead of Revenue Receipt, is answered by this Court in case of The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s Gujarat Flurochemicals LTD in Tax Appeal No.423 of 2023 wherein, the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court has answered the similar question pertaining to treating the income from realisation of Carbon Credit as capital in nature as under : 4.5 Similarly, in case of the last question (F), the coordinate bench has answered the same as below: 26. The fifth question proposed by the revenue whether the income from the Carbon Credits is capital in nature. This issue is squarely covered by the following decisions: (1) M/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pital Receipt. 5. In view of the decision of this Court in case of Gujarat Flurochemicals LTD (Supra), we are of the opinion that no substantial questions of law arise from the impugned order of the Tribunal wherein, the Tribunal has followed the decision for its earlier year. 6. So far as question No.(ii) is concerned, the same is answered by the decision of this Court in case of Commissioner of Income Tax-IV versus Suzlon Energy Limited reported in (2013) 354 ITR 630 (Gujarat) wherein also the Tribunal followed this decision for the Assessment Year 2014-15 wherein, in turn the decision of the Tribunal for Assessment Year 2012-13 was followed on the similar issue as under : 50. Ground no.4 reads as under: 4. Whether on the facts circumstan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ecord and have gone through the orders of authorities below. Regarding the grounds raised by the revenue in respect of disallowance of interest expenditure made by the A.O under Section 14A and deletion made by learned CIT (A), we find that no interference is called for in the order of learned CIT (A). We hold so because we find that with regard to the investment of Rs. 5907.18 lacs in foreign subsidiaries, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A because dividend income from foreign subsidiaries is taxable in India. Regarding balance investment of Rs. 38 crores approximately in Indian subsidiaries, we find that interest free own funds of the assessee is many time more than this investment because interest free funds available with the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
