TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 547X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - - - Dated:- 3-8-2016 - Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member and Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member For The Appellant : Shri Satyanarayana Raju For The Respondent : Shri M.A. Gohel ORDER Per Jason P. Boaz, A.M. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)- 22, Mumbai dated 16.09.2014 for A.Y. 2010-11. The assessee has also preferred cross objections (CO) against the aforesaid order of the CIT(A)-22, Mumbai. 2. The facts of the case, briefly, are as under: - 2.1 The assessee, a company engaged in the business of manufacturing of material handling equipment and generation of power, filed its return of income for A.Y. 2010-11 on 11.10.2010 declaring income of ₹ 20,47,91,860/-. The case was taken up for scrutiny and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') vide order dated 07.12.2012, wherein the income of the assessee was determined at ₹ 22,30,84,630/- in view of the following additions/ disallowances: - (i) Disallowance under section 14A ₹ 2,39,342/- (ii) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ince the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the aforesaid decision of the Coordinate Bench (supra), Revenue s appeal is liable to be dismissed. 3.4.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record. We find that, as submitted by the learned A.R. for the assessee, this issue before us, i.e. whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act, has been adjudicated in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 in ITA No. 2342/Mum/2012 dated 13.09.2012 wherein at para 2.4 thereof it has been held as under: - 2.4 Having heard both the sides and perused the material on record, it is observed that the ITAT in ITA Nos. 7944, 7946, 2255 7943/Mum/2011 for the AYs. 2005-06 to 2008-09 in the assessee s own case while deciding an issue, i.e., section 80-IA (5) being applicable for the current year, whether the assessee s claim for set off of loss/allowance u/s 32(2) 70 and 71 is against other income, admittedly from a not eligible business source, sustainable in law , has held the same in affirmative in favour of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o the parties. We order and direct accordingly. 3.4.2 Following the above cited decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 (supra), we uphold the finding of the learned CIT(A) that the assessee is eligible for deduction under section 80IA of the Act and also the directions of the learned CIT(A) to the AO to verify as to whether the losses have already been set off against the income of non-eligible unit in the earlier years and in case the losses were already set off then the same cannot be notionally carried forward for setting off against for computing the deduction under section 80IA of the Act. We hold and direct accordingly. Consequently, the grounds at S.No. 1 to 4 raised by Revenue are rejected. 4. In the result, Revenue s appeal for A.Y. 2010-11 is dismissed. 5. Assessee s CO No. 82/Mum/2016 for A.Y. 2010-11 5.1 In this CO the assessee has raised the following objections: - I. DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT ₹ 2,39,3421-: 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] in confirming the disallowance under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to Ltd. or Mutual Funds nor that the same were purchased only with own funds and internal accruals. In this view of the matter, the learned CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of ₹ 2,39,342/- made by the AO. 6.3 Before us, the learned A.R. reiterated the contentions put forth in the grounds of appeal that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the disallowance of ₹ 2,39,342/- under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D, since it was made in respect of interest expenditure incurred on Term Loans taken for purchase of Windmills. 6.4 Per contra, the learned D.R. for Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. 6.5.1 We have heard the rival contentions and perused and carefully considered the material on record. It is the submission of the assessee before the learned CIT(A) that interest expenditure incurred during the year to the extent of ₹ 39,20,797/-, and in respect of which the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D of ₹ 2,39,342/- is made by the AO, pertains to Term Loan availed for acquiring Windmill Plants referred to in the earlier years as reflected in Schedule 18 to the Audited Balance Sheet as on 31.03.2010. In these circumstances, the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
