9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 487X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eal by the Revenue arising out of the Order by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai ('CIT(A)' for short) dated 01.11.2011, partly allowing the assessee's appeal contesting its assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act' hereinafter) vide order dated 16.11.2010 for the assessment year (A.Y.) 2007-08. 2. The facts in brief are that the assessee was found to be in rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ance in principle, restricted the same to Rs.10,000/-, as against @ 0.5% of the average investment by the A.O. As clarified by the hon'ble bombay high court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mf. Co. Ltd. vs. Dy.CIT [2010] 328 ITR 81 (Bom), rule 8D, which stood applied by the A.O., was not retrospective and would apply only from A.Y. 2008-09 onwards, though, however, section 14A having been inserted re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n disallowance qua administrative and management expenses as low as at 2% of the exempt income, had been found justifiable, taking us through the relevant parts of the said orders: Sr. No. Case Citation 1. Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation Vs. DCIT (Intl. Tax) (2012) 34 CCH 013 Mumbai 2. ITO Vs. M/s. BPS Securities P. Ltd. ITA NO. 123/Kol/2010 3. DDIT (IT) Vs. State Bank of Mauritius ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the authorities are silent in the matter. The Revenue has also not brought on record its figure, with reference to which only, coupled with other relevant information, the reasonability or otherwise of the disallowance, which is being impugned by the Revenue, could be adjudged by us. Under the circumstances, the disallowance at Rs.10,000/-, which works to 6.17% of the exempt income, cannot be h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
