TMI Blog2012 (9) TMI 1091X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d against the order dated 26.8.2010 of CIT (A) for the assessment year 2007-2008. 2. The only effective ground raised in this appeal by the assessee is as under: The ld CIT (A) erred in law and facts in upholding the disallowance of ₹ 73,26,345/- u/s 14A out of interest. The reasons given by him for doing so are wrong and contrary to the facts of the case and provisions of law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ent. 4. We have heard the learned AR as well as the learned DR and considered the relevant material on record. At the outset we note that an identical issue has been considered and decided by the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2006-2007 vide order dated 29.3.2011 in para 3 as under: We have considered the facts and the rival contentions. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned sources amounted to ₹ 89.00 crores and borrowed funds amounted to ₹ 5.00 crores. The investment during the year was ₹ 97.00 crores. Even going by these figures and applying the presumption laid down in the aforesaid judgment, the investment to the extent of ₹ 89.00 crores should have been taken to have come out of the assessee s owned sources. In that case, there would ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sh decision with regard to the applicability of section 14A of the Act in respect of the interest after giving adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We also make it clear that the Assessing Officer shall not invoke Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules which has been held to be applicable only from the assessment year 2008-2009 by the Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej Boyce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
