TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1350X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... I, Pune dated 17.07.2012 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dated 12.12.2011 passed by the Assessing Officer, under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act"), pertaining to the assessment year 2009-10. 2. In this appeal, the solitary dispute raised by the assessee is with regard to the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of Rs.15,60,967/- invoking Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short "the Rules"). 3. In brief, the facts are that assessee is an individual, who filed his return of income for assessment year 2009-10 declaring total income of Rs.97,08,110/-, which inter-alia included income from the business and income from other sources. The Assessing Officer no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t that the calculation as per Rule 8D of the Rules was given at the time of hearing on 09.12.2011 only on the insistence of the Assessing Officer, and that the assessee never agreed to the addition. The learned counsel further pointed out that the plea of the assessee has been unjustly disregarded by the CIT(A). The learned counsel further pointed out that if at all any addition under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules is to be sustained, there was no justification for the disallowance of Rs.13,05,631/- made in terms of Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules inasmuch as there was no interest expenditure which could not be directly attributable to any particular income, whereas the case of the assessee was that the entire interest ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... led for. 7. We have carefully considered the rival submission. The relevant discussion in the assessment order reveals that in the course of assessment proceedings, assessee was show-caused as to why the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act could not be made, considering that assessee had declared both taxable as well as exempt income. It is further noted by the Assessing Officer that in the written submission dated 09.12.2011, assessee agreed that he was hit by the provisions of Section 14A of the Act. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer worked out the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules amounting to Rs.15,60,967/-, as detailed in para 5 of the assessment order. On this basis, the stand of the Rev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed in sustaining the disallowance on the ground that the assessee agreed to the addition. 10. In so far as the merits of the disallowance are concerned, in our view, the CIT(A) made no mistake in upholding the disallowance in terms of discussion in para 3.4 of the impugned order. The assessee's assertion that the entire interest expenditure was attributable to business income and therefore it could not be considered for disallowance in terms of Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules, in our view, is devoid of any factual support. In-fact, the CIT(A) has rejected the said plea on the ground that the same was "not backed by any evidence or material on record". Ostensibly, the said position continues even before us inasmuch as there is no material to s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
