Contact us   Feedback   Annual Subscription   New User   Login      
Tax Management India .com
TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

2016 (11) TMI 1152 - ITAT MUMBAI

2016 (11) TMI 1152 - ITAT MUMBAI - TMI - Disallowance u/s.14A - Held that:- On appraisal of the order passed by the Assessing Officer we found nothing ambiguity for the application of the Rule 8D of the Act for calculation of the expenses to earn the exempt income. The Assessing Officer has assessed the expenditure in view of the facts and circumstances of the case wherein no specific expenditure has been shown to be explained to earn exempt income. Therefore, in the said circumstances the CIT(A .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

on the basis of the ownership of the property. Utilization of land and sale of land is quite different. Accordingly the income of assessee is required to be assessed. It is not a case of double taxation when the income of the assessee was assessed on the basis of utilization and sale of land. Since the matter of controversy has not been adjudicated by the CIT(A) on the basis title, therefore, we set aside the finding of the CIT(A) in this regard and direct the Assessing Officer to decide this is .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 29, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A) ] relevant to the A.Y.2009-10. 2. The assessee has raised the following grounds:- 1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-29, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as Ld. CIT(A) ] erred in passing the order dated 04.01.2013 under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as of the Act ] confirming the action of the A.O. in making following additions and disallowances without appreciat .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

section 14A r.w.Rule 8D is not justified and hence, the same may be deleted. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the Ld. A.O. has not given any reasons why he considers that Appellant has incurred expenditure to earn exempt income over and above Rs. 2,65,068/-. Thus, the provision of Rules 8D are not applicable. Hence, the disallowance of ₹ 1,32,944/- is not justified. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) further failed to appreciate that the Appellant has incurred Rs. 2,65,068 as expenditure with 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

m capital gains on account of transfer of Depreciable asset are not tenable as the block of asset continues to exist in the books of the appellant. Thus, addition of Rs. 49,71,900/- is not justified. C. Levy of interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act not justified 7. The appellant denies any liability to pay interest under section 234A, 234B and 234C of the Act. Hence, the same are not leviable. 3. The brief facts of the case are the at the assessee filed his return of income for 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

ne of ₹ 3,98,012/- whereas the assessee disallowed the expenditure to the tune of ₹ 2,65,068 and added the difference to the tune of ₹ 1,32,944 to the income of assessee and also assessed the income from other sources on account of sale of piece of land by the assessee but the assessee was not satisfied, therefore an appeal was filed before CIT(A) who confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer, therefore the assessee filed the present appeal before us. ISSUE NO.1 TO 4:- 4. Un .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

ividend on mutual fund : 11,24,415/- (6) PPF Interest : 6,20,544/- TOTAL : 27,85,042/- The CIT(A) has confirmed the said order. The contention of the assessee is that the Rule 8D of the Act is not applicable to the facts of the case because the assessee himself has disallowed the expenditure to the tune of ₹ 2,65,068/- to earn the exempt income. No bifurcation of the expenses is on record. If the bifurcation of the expenses to earn the exempt income is not on record therefore it is quite c .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

herefore, in the said circumstances the CIT(A) has rightly confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer on this issue which does not require to be interfere with at this appellate stage. ISSUE NO.5 & 6:- 5. The assessee has challenged the addition of income from other sources to the tune of ₹ 49,71,900/-. Before going further it is necessary to advert the finding of the CIT(A) on this issue on record:- 6. I have considered the facts of the case, findings in assessment order and submiss .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

has been showing this asset regularly in its Balance Sheet and has also been claiming depreciation thereon. (iv) Even the registration of the property has been done in the name of firm, M/s.Ashok L. Shah and not in the name of the individual i.e., Ashok L. Shah. (v) The ownership of immovable properties cannot be transferred by any internal agreement between the partners. There has to be registered legal agreement for transfer of asset. (vi) Nobody can claim ownership by inserting a clause to th .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

of the appellant. However, since the amount has been credited in the books of the appellant, this is undoubtedly income in his hands. It is not a case where capital gain is offered in the hands of the firm by filing a revised return. Thus, it is not a case of double taxation. The gain/income has to be taxed at some place - either in the case of firm or in the case of appellant. As no income has been offered in case of firm M/s.Ashok L .Shah, this income is rightly taxed by the Assessing Officer .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

circumstances the ownership of the property lies with the assessee and the sale of the said property is liable to be assessed as Long Term Capital Gain. Therefore, in the said circumstances the order passed by the CIT(A) is wrong against law and facts and is liable to be set aside. However the Ld Representative of the department refuted the said contention. The order passed by the CIT(A) speaks about this facts that the said land was belonging to the firm M/s. Ashok L. Shah which cannot be trea .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 



|| Home || Acts and Rules || Notifications || Circulars || Schedules || Tariff || Forms || Case Laws || Manuals ||

|| About us || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members || Site Map ||

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

Go to Mobile Version