TMI Blog2014 (3) TMI 426X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnot be invoked at all – matter remitted back to the AO for de novo adjudication - Decided in favour of assesse. - I.T.A. No.1759/Kol/2011 - - - Dated:- 31-8-2012 - Shri Pramod Kumar and Shri Mahavir Singh, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri S. K. Agarwal For the Respondent : Shri A.K. Pramanik ORDER Per Pramod Kumar 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), Central-I, Kolkata dated 7th September, 2011 in the matter of assessment u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2008-09. 2. In the first ground of appeal, the grievance raised by the assessee is that the ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.45,04,471/- under section 14A. 3. Briefly stated, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he revenue that directly or indirectly some expenditure is always incurred which must be disallowed under Section 14A and the impact of expenditure so incurred cannot be allowed to be set off against the business income which may nullify the mandate of Section 14A, cannot be accepted. Disallowance under Section 14A requires finding of incurring of expenditure where it is found that for earning exempted income no expenditure has been incurred, dial1owance under Section 14A cannot stand. In the present case finding on this aspect, against the revenue, is not shown to be perverse. Consequently, disallowance is not permissible. We have taken this view earlier also in ITA No. 504 of 2008 (Commissioner of Income Tax Chandigarh II vs. M/s Winsome ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... penditure has been incurred at all and therefore, the mechanism of computing disallowance under rule 8D cannot be invoked. The ld. Counsel also invites our attention to the decisions of Coordinate Benches of this Tribunal in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. vs- CIT 32 SOT 101 (Delhi) and Quippo Telecom Infra Ltd. vs- ACIT in ITA No.4931/Del/2010. Our attention is also invited to the judgment of the Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT-vs- Wimco Seedlings Ltd. On the strength of these submissions, the ld. Counsel prays that the matter be restored to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication, in the light of inter alia, the above judicial precedents. 5. The ld. D.R. does not object to the prayer for restoration of the matter to the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 7. Ground no.1 is thus allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above. 8. In ground no.2, the assessee has raised the grievance against CIT(A) s confirming the addition of Rs.45,04,471/- being amount disallowed under section 14A, while computing book profit under section 115JB. In view of the fact that the issue of disallowance under section 14A has been remitted to the file of the AO, the grievance raised by the assessee in the above ground of appeal does not call for any adjudication at this stage. We accordingly decline to address this issue. Ground no.2 is, therefore, dismissed as infructuous. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
