TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 1095
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ndent : Shri K Krishna Murty ORDER Per B R Baskaran, AM These cross appeals are directed against the order dated 27-02-2013 passed by Ld CIT(A)-13, Mumbai and they relate to the assessment year 2008-09. 2. The assessee is carrying on banking business. The first issue urged in the appeal of the assessee relates to the disallowance made u/s 14A of the Act. The Ld A.R submitted that the disallowa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s issue and perused the record. We agree with the contention of the assessee that no disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(i) and (ii) is required to be made, if the non- interest bearing funds available with the assessee are more than the amount of investment which generate tax free income, since the said view has been upheld by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT V/s HDFC BANK LTD. [201....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enses for the purpose of purchase, maintenance and sale of investments and hence a portion of administrative expenses is required to be disallowed even if no dividend income is received, the ld. AR agreed that the said disallowance may be restricted to Rs. 5,93,655/- as computed by the assessee before the tax authorities. 6. We find merit in the said submissions, since the object of the assessee ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) on this issue. 8. The only issue urged in the appeal of the Revenue relates to disallowance of claim of loss of Rs. 13.31 crores arising on account of re-valuation of securities. The said disallowance was deleted by the ld. CIT(A) by following the decision rendered by him on identical issue in the assessment year 2006-07. The ld.AR pointed out that the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal has cons....