TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n it has been held that the AO has not recorded any objective satisfaction as to how the disallowance as calculated by the assessee is wrong by referring to the books of accounts of the assessee. Accordingly, we, respectfully, following the decision of the Hon ble Bombay High Court [ 2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] and also the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in the assessee s own case in A.Y. 2009-10 and 2010-11, set aside the order of Ld. CIT(A) and direct the AO to accept the disallowance as calculated by the assessee. The ground no. 1 is allowed. Excess interest charged u/s 234C - excess interest charged under section 234C which has occurred due to non granting of credit of TDS - HELD THAT:- We observe that in this case the o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved that assessee has shown exempt income by way of dividend of ₹ 3,59,21,689/- and has made suo motto disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D at ₹ 6,91,341/-. The AO vide order sheet dated 14.09.2016 issued a show cause notice to the assessee as to why the disallowance should not be worked out by applying provisions of section 14A read with rule 8D which was replied by the assessee by submitting that it has already disallowed ₹ 6,91,341/- in the computation of income as has been calculated by the tax auditor in the tax audit report. However, the AO did not agree to the contentions of the assessee and applied the provisions of section 14A read with rule 8D by relying on the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal in assessee s own case in earlier years in ITA No.696/M/2017 ors. order dated 24.04.2019 and ITA No.1279/M/2016 A.Y. 2010-11 order dated 08.11.2018. Therefore, the Ld. A.R. submitted that the order of Ld. CIT(A) should be set aside on the ground that it has failed to consider that no satisfaction has been recorded by the AO in the assessment order in view of the decision of the co-ordinate bench of the Tribunal. The Ld. A.R. further referred to the balance sheet of the assessee at page 8 of the paper book and submitted that assessee s own funds which were to the tune of ₹ 254,65,30,000/- and the investments in securities were far below the said amount and thus in view of the decision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e note that the assessee has made disallowance of ₹ 6,91,341/- which has been tabulated by the tax auditor in the tax audit report. After perusing the assessment order carefully we observe that the AO has not recorded any satisfaction as to how the disallowance worked out by the assessee of ₹ 6,91,341/- is wrong having regards to the books of accounts of the assessee. The issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT [(2010) 328 ITR 81 (Bom)] wherein it has been held that no disallowance section 14A read with rule 8D can be made if the AO has not recorded objective satisfaction on the d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5,028/- which is wrong and has to be restored to the file of the AO with the direction that the same may be calculated after giving credit of TDS to the assessee. 11. Ld. D.R., on the other hand, relied on the order of authorities below. 12. After hearing both the parties and perusing the material on record, we observe that in this case the only issue is excess interest of ₹ 5,90,691/- charged under section 234C which has occurred due to non granting of credit of TDS to the tune of ₹ 14,85,028/-. In our opinion, this interest needs to be calculated correctly as per the provisions of law. Therefore, the issue is restored to the file of the AO with the direction to calculate the interest after allowin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
