Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

Bharat Petroleum Corporation Ltd Versus DCIT, Range 2 (1) , Mumbai

2015 (10) TMI 1483 - ITAT MUMBAI

Validity of the notice issued under section 154 - disallowance u/s 14A - condonation of delay - Held that:- When the assessee has explained the facts and circumstances under which the assessee was having confusion in the mind for filing the separate appeal against the order passed u/s 154 on the issue of disallowance u/s 14A because the assessee had already filed an appeal before the CIT(A) raising the ground against the disallowance made u/s 14A by applying Rule 8D. Therefore, when there is no .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

se cannot be doubted. Accordingly, we are satisfied that the assessee explained a sufficient cause for delay in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). Addition made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) being 0.5% of the average investment - Held that:- Rule 8D is not applicable for the A.Y. 2008-09 in view of the decision of Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT ]. Accordingly, the addition made by Assessing Officer while passing t .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

/2013 - Dated:- 25-3-2015 - Vijay Pal Rao, JM And N. K. Billaiya, AM,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri J D Mistri For the Respondent : Shri S J Singh ORDER Per Vijay Pal Rao, This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order dated 25.4.2013 arising from the order passed u/s 154 for A.Y. 2006-07. The assessee has raised following grounds in this appeal:- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax [CIT(A)] erred in not condoning .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Assessing Officer when Rule 80 was inapplicable to the assessment year under appeal and consequently erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 3,88,75,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 80." 2. The assessment was completed u/s 143(3) on 26.12.2008, assessing total income u/s 115JB at ₹ 294.51 crores. During the completion of assessment proceedings u/s 143(3), the Assessing Officer made disallowance u/s 14A r. .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e assessee and passed the order dated 21.07.2010 u/s 154 whereby an additional disallowance of ₹ 3.88 lakh u/s 14A r.w.r 8D being 0.5% of the average investment was made. 3. The assessee challenged the action of Assessing Officer before CIT(A). There was a delay of 2 and half months in filing the appeal before the CIT(A). The assessee filed a condonation petition along with appeal and contended that the issue regarding disallowance u/s 14A was decided by the Assessing Officer in the regula .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Before us, the Ld. Senior Counsel has submitted that the assessee has explained the cause of delay before the CIT(A) that there was a confusion regarding the separate appeal against the order passed u/s 154 on the issue of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D when the same issue was already raised by the assessee against the original assessment order passed u/s 143(3), therefore, there was a delay which was explained by the assessee. He has relied upon the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

which the assessee was having confusion in the mind for filing the separate appeal against the order passed u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act on the issue of disallowance u/s 14A because the assessee had already filed an appeal before the CIT(A) raising the ground against the disallowance made u/s 14A by applying Rule 8D. Therefore, when there is no material or circumstances which suggest that the delay is deliberate or on account of culpable negligence and the assessee could not stand to benefit b .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version