9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 1579X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee on 19.11.2010 is against the order of CIT (A)-20, Mumbai dated 20.9.2010 for the assessment year 2007-08. 2. In this appeal, assessee raised the following grounds which read as under: "1. The CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance u/s 14A of Rs. 2,28,944/- made by the AO and not granting relief as claimed by the appellant. 2. The CIT (A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... luding that the appellant failed to meet its onus to establish expenses disallowed by the AO, since there was no disallowance of expenses rather it was ½% of average value of investment that was disallowed by the learned officer. 6. The CIT (A) erred in relying to the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Munjal Sales Corporation vs. CIT 298 ITR (SC), since the facts of the giv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5. We heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue. It is a fact that the relevant assessment year is 2007-08 under consideration is outside the scope of provisions of Rule 8D. The said provisions cannot be treated as applicable to the A.Y.2007-08 under consideration indirectly when the same is precluded by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der dated 10.9.2009 for the Assessment Years 2003-2004 and 2004-2005 wherein disallowance was restricted to 2% of the exempt income. Further; the Tribunal has remanded the matter to the AO to verify the disallowance claimed and restrict the disallowance only to the extent to 2% of the total exempt income. We find no fault with the order of the Tribunal. " Considering the binding nature of the jud ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
