TMI Blog2019 (6) TMI 246X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... re. Therefore, returned income declared by the assessee in the light of nature of business of assessee, we are of the view that addition is excessive. The interest of justice requires that addition may be restricted to ₹ 6 lakhs only as against ₹ 12 lakhs. This would meet the ends of justice in the facts and circumstances of the case. Ground No.1 of appeal of Assessee is partly allowed. Disallowance u/s 14Ar.w.r. 8D - HELD THAT:- Addition is wholly unjustified. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT [ 2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT] held that no exempted income was earned by the assessee in the relevant assessment year and since genuineness of the expenditure incurred by the assessee was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the addition of ₹ 12 lakhs on account of adhoc disallowance on travelling, car running/maintenance and direct expenses. 3.1. In this case, assessee filed return of income declaring income of ₹ 6.73 crores. The assessee company is engaged in business of construction. The assessee produced the books of account and details, which were examined by the A.O. The A.O. asked the assessee to produce the ledger account for expenses incurred by the company, which were produced by the assessee from time to time. The assessee has debited in the P L A/c travelling expenses etc., in a sum of ₹ 2,12,18,987/-. The assessee was asked to produce the bills and vouchers of these expenses with supporting evidences and justifi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... their opinion the facts of a case justify that course. Learned Counsel for the Assessee submitted that the accounts of the assessee are audited, in which, Chartered Accountant has given unqualified certificate in favour of the assessee. Therefore, no addition should be made. He has alternatively submitted that addition is excessive in nature. 5. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the Orders of the authorities below and submitted that since no bills and vouchers have been produced, therefore, addition is justified. 6. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that addition is excessive in nature. It is a fact that assessee produced the books of account and ledger acco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... de in shares and agricultural land. The assessee submitted a reply, in which, assessee explained that investment made in shares is that of Group companies. Investment made in Group companies for control purpose is to be viewed from a different angle rather than mere dividend income. In the instant case, assessee had purchased shares of Group companies and agricultural land. In both the cases, the intention is not to earn income which does not form part of the taxable income. In case of acquisition of shares of Group companies, there has never been any dividend being received from the Group companies, even till date. The shares were purchased as the assessee wish to enter into other projects. The A.O. however, did not accept the contention o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, no addition could be made against the assessee. He has relied upon the Judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT (Central)-1, vs. Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd., (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC), in which it was held as under : SLP dismissed against High Court ruling that Section 14A cannot be invoked where no exempt income was earned by assessee in relevant assessment year. 11. After considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that addition is wholly unjustified. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 (Del.) held that no exempted income was earned by the assessee in the relevant assessment year and since genuin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
