TMI Blog2019 (3) TMI 1729X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tax effect , and had been passed ignoring the legislative intent expressed in CBDT Circular No.5/2014 dated 11-02-14 and principal laid down in various decisions that apportionment of expenses has been to be done regardless of exempt income earned. The same, we hold, is not tenable in law since it is only apparent mistakes which can be rectified by way of the present proceedings and for challenging orders passed by the ITAT there is legal recourse available which definitely does not include challenging it by way of the present Miscellaneous Application under section 254(2) of the Act. The Miscellaneous Application is liable to be dismissed for the aforesaid reason. - MA No. 50/Chd/2019 In ITA No.656/Chd/2018 - - - Dated:- 27-3-2019 - S ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s below the monetary limit as laid down vide Inst. No.3/2018(earlier 21/2015), ignoring the fact that the case is covered under the except ion (b) of para 10 drawn in the aforesaid circular due to CBDT Circular No.5/2014 dated 11.02.2014 (iii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Hon ble ITAT is justified in dismissing the appeal of the revenue on tax effect, and not deciding the merits, ignoring the legislative intent expressed in CBDT s Circular No.5/2014 dated 11.02.2014,which explicitly states that expenses relatable to earning of exempt income have to be considered for disallowance irrespective of the fact whether any such income has been earned during the F.Y or not as confirmed by Apex Cour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d following decisions in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd.,323 ITR 204 and CIT vs Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. , 319 ITR 204 whose facts are distinguishable from the taxpayers, ignoring the principal of apportionment laid down by Hon ble Supreme Court decision in CIT vs Wal fort Share and Stock Brokers P Ltd:326 ITR 1 (SC) and upheld by the Hon ble Supreme Court in 91 Taxmann.com 154 (SC)? 3. It has therefore been requested that the order passed in ITA No.656/Chd/2018 dt .01-08-18 be recalled and decided on merits. 4. We have heard the Ld.DR and also gone through the contents of the Miscellaneous Application filed before us . From a perusal of the same we do not find any mistake pointed out in the order passed by the ITAT. On the con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
