TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1405X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee had sufficient interest free funds available with it, which is more than the investments made. Therefore, applying the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities Ltd (2009 (1) TMI 4 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) and CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd.(2014 (8) TMI 119 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT), no disallowance of expenditure can be made under Rule 8D(2)(ii). That being so, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) read with section 14A of the Act. This ground is dismissed. Applicability of section 14A r.w.r. 8D while computing book profit u/s. 115JB - Held that:- After analyzing the provisions contained u/s. 115JB we agr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal, except, the quantum, for the sake of convenience, we shall deal with the facts as involved in ITA No.4417/Mum/2012 for A.Y. 2008-09. 3. Brief, facts are the assessee - a company, is engaged in manufacture and trading of electrical goods. For the assessment year under dispute assessee filed its return of income on 30.09.2008 declaring total income at Nil under the normal provisions after set-off of brought forward losses. Whereas, assessee offered book profit of ₹ 12,43,11,886 u/s. 115JB of the Act. Subsequently, assessee filed revised return of income on 12.03.2010 declaring total income at ₹ 10,73,84,259/- after set-off of brought forward loss of ₹ 32,08,23,143/-. During the assessment proceedings, the Assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on in respect of dividend income of ₹ 19,82,960/-. Being aggrieved of disallowance made u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D, assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). 4. The learned CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee in the context of fact and material available before him, observed that as against surplus interest free funds available with the assessee to the tune of ₹ 398.79 crore, the investments made by the assessee amounted to ₹ 43.97 crore. Therefore, following the decision of Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities Ltd. (313 ITR 340), learned CIT(A) held that no disallowance of interest expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(ii) can be made. However, as regards disallowan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing the year were made in A.Y. 1993-94 and in that assessment year also the assessee had sufficient interest free funds available with it to make investment. Thus, the learned AR submitted, learned CIT(A) s decision to delete the disallowance of interest expenditure made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) is in consonance with the ratio of decision laid down by the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs. Reliance Utilities Ltd (supra) and CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (366 ITR 505) 7. We have considered rival submissions and perused material on record. We have also applied our mind to the decisions relied upon. The specific dispute between the parties is with regard to disallowance of interest expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Rules. A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... FC Bank Ltd.(supra), no disallowance of expenditure can be made under Rule 8D(2)(ii). That being so, we do not find any infirmity in the decision of the learned CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(ii) read with section 14A of the Act. This ground is dismissed. 8. The common issue raised in ground no.2 of all these appeals is with regard to applicability of section 14A read with Rule 8D while computing book profit u/s. 115JB of the Act. Briefly, facts are while making disallowance u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D of the Act under the normal provisions, the Assessing Officer also added it to the book profit computed u/s. 115JB of the Act. The assessee challenged aforesaid decision of the Assessing Officer before the CIT(A). ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
