9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 648X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al filed by the Revenue on 19.7.2011 is against the order of the CIT (A)-35, Mumbai dated 6.5.2011 for the assessment year 2008-2009. 2. In this appeal, Revenue raised the following grounds which read as under: "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) erred in restricting the disallowance made by the AO under Section 14A of the IT Act, at Rs. 2,36,62,861/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons of section 14A and computed the disallowance of Rs. 2,36,02,861/- by applying Rule-8D of the I T Rules 1962. Aggrieved with the decision of AO, assessee filed an appeal before the first appellate authority and the CIT (A) restricted the disallowance u/s 14A from 2,36,62,861/- to Rs. 8,65,564/-. Revenue is aggrieved with the order of the CIT (A) and filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 09)) (iii)M/s. Prescient Securities Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT (ITA No.5281/M/2011 (AY: 2008-09)) (iv)Ganjam trading Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. DCIT (ITA Nos. 3724/M/2005; 932/M/2006 and 1384/M/07) (v)M/s. Auchtel Products Ltd vs. ACIT (ITA No.3183/M/2011 (AY2003-04)) 5. He also mentioned that the views take strength from the judgment in the case of M/s. India Advantage Securities Ltd (supra). However, in respon ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tock-in-trade as held by the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of M/s. CCI Ltd., vs. JCIT (supra). The Hon'ble Kerala High Court judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax Vs Smt. Leena Ramachandran (Ker) (339 ITR 296) was distinguished. However, it is for the assessee to demonstrate that the exempt income earned by him is out of the stocks held for trading purposes. In our opini ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
