Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 846 - ITAT AHMEDABADAddition u/s.14A r.w.r. 8D - HELD THAT:- During the course of assessment, the ld. CIT(A) has held that in view of the ratio of various case laws in set aside proceedings with specific directions, the Assessing Officer cannot exceed the disallowance and addition made in the original assessment order as reduced by the ld. CIT(A) which was subject matter before the ITAT. CIT(A) has also referred the decision of ITAT Bombay Special Bench in the case of Daga Capital and Management Ltd. [2008 (10) TMI 383 - ITAT MUMBAI] that the applicability of rule 8D is prospective w.e.f. 1st April, 2008 and for earlier years the disallowance has to be made reasonably on fact of the case. Taking into consideration, the aforesaid facts and judicial finding, the ld. CIT(A) has stated that in the original order, the Assessing Officer has adopted a reasonable view on the basis of proportion of dividend income to total sales i.e. 0.83 lacs, director’s remuneration, travelling expenditure of ₹ 501.33 lacs and other administrative and miscellaneous expenditure of ₹ 3219.29 lacs which required disallowance to the amount of ₹ 30,88,115/-. With the assistance of ld. representatives, we have also perused the decision in CIT Ahmedabad vs. S. R. Tele Holding Pvt. Ltd.[2017 (5) TMI 1160 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] wherein it is held that rule 8D is prospective in operation and cannot be applied to any assessment year prior to assessment year 2008-09. After taking into consideration the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court as referred above and findings of ld. CIT(A) as elaborated above, we do not find any infirmity in the finding of ld. CIT(A), therefore, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Disallowance u/s. 80IC - HELD THAT:- After considering the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of the ITAT Ahmedabad in the case of the assessee itself pertaining to the assessment year 2010-11 and 2011-12 on identical issue and facts, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of ld. CIT(A) on allocating common interest and financial charges on the basis of investment and deleting the addition of common head expenses and administrative/corporate division expenses made on sale basis. Therefore, we do not find any merit in this ground of appeal of the revenue and the same stands dismissed. Addition u/s 14A - As no expenditure has been incurred for earning exempt income no disallowance to be made.
|