Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 1010 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A r.w.r.8D - Suo moto disallowance rejected - AO invoked direct, proportionate interest and administrative expenses disallowance u/Rule 8D(2)(i) to (iii) as against the suo moto disallowance offered at the tax Payer’s behest - revenue argued that in Maxopp Investment Ltd. [2018 (3) TMI 805 - SUPREME COURT] has already settled the law that such a disallowance relating to an assessee’s exempt income has to be made - HELD THAT:- We do not find any merit in the Revenue’s foregoing contention. We make it clear that the issue before us is not that of application but computation of Section 14A r.w.r 8D disallowance since the CIT(A) has only directed the Assessing Officer to quantify the same to the extent of exempt income only as per hon’ble jurisdictional high court’s decision as well as Joint Investment P. Ltd. [2015 (3) TMI 155 - DELHI HIGH COURT] - no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)’s directions under challenge. The Revenue fails in its first and foremost substantive ground. Section 14A r.w.r. 8D disallowance for the purpose of Section 115JB of the Act under MAT computation - This tribunal’s Special Bench decision in ACIT Vs Vireet Investments (P.) Ltd. [2017 (6) TMI 1124 - ITAT DELHI] has already settled the law that such a disallowance is not to be included in the MAT computation. We thus decline Revenue’s third substantive ground’s argument as well. Admission of additional claim without filing a revised return - additional depreciation - Addition being balance 10% on the cost of machinery which was put to use for less than 180 days during the preceding year - HELD THAT:- We find no merit in the Revenue’s grievance. We make it clear that the hon’ble apex court’s decision in Goetze (India) Ltd. [2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT] holds that same does not impinge upon the appellate authorities’ jurisdiction vested under the provisions of the Act. Hon’ble jurisdictional high court in Budhewal Co-operative Society Ltd. [2013 (5) TMI 802 - ITAT CHANDIGARH] also holds that a tax payer is very much entitled to raise an additional claim without filing a revised return. The Revenue’s pleadings nowhere indicate that there is any distinction on facts since the assessee’s identical additional depreciation claim stood allowed in A.Y. 2013-14 as well - Decided in favour of assessee.
|