TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 265X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the assessee Addition of the interest expenditure u/s 36(i)(iii) - interest free advances - Held that:- In the earlier assessment year 2012-13 which has been decided by this Tribunal in the own case wherein, the Tribunal after considering the rival submissions of the parties has decided the issue in favour of the assessee by holding that assessee was possessed of sufficient own funds to meet the investment / interest free advances made. The Tribunal while allowing this issue in favour of the assessee has relied upon the decision in the case of ‘Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd.’ [2009 (1) TMI 4 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and ‘Bright Enterprise Pvt Ltd. Vs. CIT’ [2015 (11) TMI 342 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT] - decided in favour of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ficer under section 14A of the Income Tax Act particularly when the similar disallowance had been partly confirmed by the CIT(A) in the case of M/s Malwa Cotton Spinning Mills Ltd. in AYs 2010-11, 2011-12 and 2012-13? 1.2 Whether on the facts circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) has justified in not following the ratios laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Industry Limited 402 ITR 640 and Godrej Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. 394 ITR 449 and CBDT's Circular No. 05/2014. 2. Whether on the facts Circumstances of the case and in law, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was justified in deleting the disallowance of ₹ 1,37,12,660/- made by the Assessing Offic ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... made by the Assessing officer u/s 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). 5. A perusal of the above grounds of appeal itself reveals that the Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the additions made by the Assessing officer u/s 14A of the Act on the ground that the assessee did not earn any exempt income during the year under consideration. The issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by various decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts including that of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles (2009) 319 ITR 204 (P H) and Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd Vs. ITO (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) and of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n pointed out by the Ld. DR for the year under consideration. This issue is squarely covered by the various decisions of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Kapsons Associates (2016) 381 ITR 204 (P H), and the latest decision of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Janak Global Resources Pvt Ltd ITA No. 470/Chd/2018 order dated 16.10.2018, (incidentally consisted of both of us), wherein, the issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by also considering the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Hero Cycles Vs. CIT 379 ITR 347 (SC) and also findings arrived in the case of Avon Cycles Ltd. Vs. CIT in ITA No.277 of 2013. Hence, this issue is accordingly decided in favour of the assessee and again ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
