Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 557 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D - Held that:- We have noted that the assessee earned exempt income of ₹ 28,380/- in the form of dividend income. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. (2015 (3) TMI 155 - DELHI HIGH COURT) held that the window for disallowance indicated in section 14A is only to the extent of disallowing expenditure incurred by assessee in relation to tax exempt income. These proposition or portion of tax exempt income surely cannot swallow the entire amount. Thus, the disallowance under section 14A is restricted to the exempt income/dividend income of ₹ 28,830/-. The Assessing Officer is directed accordingly. Transfer Pricing Adjustment in relation to non-interest bearing shareholder deposit - Held that:- Considering the decision of Tribunal in assessee’s own case in identical grounds of appeal was allowed in favour of assessee on the same amount of share-holder deposits the Associate Company. Long Term Capital Gain on sale of investment not considered - application of the assessee filed under section 154 - Held that:- CIT(A) has already given direction to the Assessing Officer for disposing of the application under section 154 of the Act, filed by assessee which has not been disposed of so far. The Assessing Officer is directed to consider the claim of assessee and pass the order in accordance with law. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall grant necessary opportunity of hearing before passing the order. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed. Transfer Pricing Adjustment towards this involve in guarantee on loan and advances to Associate Enterprises - Held that:- As decided in assessee's own case when the guarantee has been given by the assessee results in a direct or indirect benefit to the assessee itself, then there arises no need to charge any commission on the same. Thus, following the decisions of the co-ordinates benches of the Tribunal we, in the present case are of the view that the above transaction does not fall within the purview of international transaction as defined under section 92B of the Act and hence, the orders of the lower authorities are reversed.
|