TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 780X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al computational provision by the AO himself and the computation of book profit was only of academic interest having no bearing on the tax liability of the assessee, therefore, this ground of appeal of revenue is also to be dismissed. So, overall, we note that the tax effect in both the grounds of appeal below the threshold limit prescribed by the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018 and, therefore, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Disallowance on account of depreciation claim u/s. 14A read with rule 8D(2)(ii) - HELD THAT:- SHRI VISHNU ANANT MAHAJAN VERSUS ACIT BARODA [2012 (6) TMI 297 - ITAT, AHMEDABAD] section 14A uses the words “expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income”. A statutory allowance under sectio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion of income which goes below the tax effect as prescribed by the CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018. Since this appeal is hit by the CBDT Circular, cited supra, this ground of appeal of revenue is dismissed. 4. Ground no. 2 of the revenue s appeal is as under: 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made u/s. 14A of the Act of ₹ 94,72,341/- to the book profit ignoring the section 115JB of the Act which stated that the disallowance made under section 14A of the Act should be added to the book profit. 5. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the computation as well as the assessment order it reveals that the assessee is assessed under the normal computational provision and not under book profit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isallowance in the return of ₹ 59,17,185/- u/s. 14A of the Act on account of expenses relatable to earning of exempt income. The AO, however, calculated the disallowance on account of interest expenses under Rule 8D2(ii) by taking all investments whether yielding exempt income or not. Similarly, disallowance for other expenses under rule 8D(2)(iii) was worked out taking depreciation claim of ₹ 21,00,707/- and included the said amount of depreciation of ₹ 21,00,707/- enhancing the disallowance u/r 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules. Aggrieved, assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who upheld the action of AO. Aggrieved, assessee is before us. 8. After having heard both the parties the question whether depreciation cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
