Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (10) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (10) TMI 34 - AT - Income TaxEntitlement of claim of deduction u/s 80IA - activities undertaken by the assessee would fall within the meaning of the term infrastructure facility as defined in Clause (d) of the ‘Explanation’ to Sec.80IA(4) ?- HELD THAT:- Tribunal while disposing off the appeal in the assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2013-14 [2019 (4) TMI 544 - ITAT MUMBAI] had after relying on the judgment of CIT Vs M/s Container Corporation of India Ltd. [2018 (5) TMI 359 - SUPREME COURT] concluded, that the CIT(A) was right in holding that the assessee was entitled for deduction under Sec.80IA(4) - the issue as regards the assessee’s entitlement for claim of deduction under Sec.80IA(4) is squarely covered by the aforesaid judicial pronouncements and also the orders passed in the assessee’s own case. Accordingly, finding no infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) who had rightly concluded that the assessee was duly entitled for claim of deduction u/s 80IA. Addition in Book Profit u/s 115JB on account of disallowance u/s 14A - HELD THAT:- As in the case of Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. [2017 (6) TMI 1124 - ITAT DELHI] A.O while computing the ‘book profit’ under Sec.115JB of the Act shall not resort to the computation as contemplated under Sec.14A r.w. Rule 8D. As regards the claim of the ld. A.R that as the investment in the exempt yielding investments were made by the assessee out of its self-owned funds and no part of the interest bearing funds were therein utilised, therefore, no disallowance of any part of the interest expenditure was called for u/s 14A r.w Rule 8D(2)(iii), we find ourselves principally to be in agreement with the same proposition so canvassed by the ld. A.R. before us. But then, the said claim of the assessee would require verification of the factual position. If the aforesaid claim of the assessee that it had sufficient self-owned funds for making the investments in the exempt income yielding investments is found to be in order, then no disallowance u/s 14A of any part of the interest expenditure would be called for in its hands. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the order in the case of CIT Vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. [2014 (8) TMI 119 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] - Decided in favour of assessee.
|