Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (4) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (4) TMI 854 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - HELD THAT:- Rule 8D is not applicable in the assessee’s case, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has contended that total disallowance was suo motu offered by the assessee u/s 14A and the same being more than the exempt dividend income of ₹ 10,88,37,814/- received by the assessee during the year under consideration, a further disallowance made by the Assessing Officer which exceeded even the exempt dividend income is not sustainable. Since this contention raised by the assessee is duly supported by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Limited –vs - CIT (2015 (3) TMI 155 - DELHI HIGH COURT), we uphold the impugned order of the CIT(Appeals) deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A as the said disallowance resulted into a total disallowance under section 14A, which was more than the exempt dividend income actually earned by the assessee during the year under consideration. Income from house property - Accepting the ALV of the assessee’s house property thereby rejecting the fair market rent - AO adopted the annual value of the property at ₹ 1.20 crores by following the stand taken in the earlier years and computed the income of the assessee under the head “income from house property” after allowing deduction under section 24(a) - HELD THAT:- This issue thus is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of this Tribunal rendered in assessee’s own case for the earlier years [2016 (1) TMI 169 - ITAT KOLKATA], which has been upheld by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court and respectfully following the same, we uphold the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) giving relief to the assessee on this issue. Ground No. 2 is accordingly dismissed. Addition on account of excess expenditure allegedly claimed by the assessee - HELD THAT:- This working prepared and furnished by the assessee during the course of assessment proceedings was not properly understood and appreciated by the Assessing Officer and he made a huge disallowance without recording any adverse finding about the genuineness or the business expediency of the said expenditure. CIT(Appeals), on the other hand, appreciated the working furnished by the assessee in the right perspective and deleted the disallowance made by the AO, which was unsustainable and unfounded in the facts and circumstances of the case. We, therefore, find no infirmity in the impugned order of the CIT(Appeals) giving relief to the assessee on this issue and upholding the same, we dismiss Ground No. 3 of the Revenue’s appeal.
|