9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (4) TMI 625X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reinafter the 'Act') read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 ( in short, hereinafter the "Rules"). It is noted that the assessee had an exempt income (dividend) of Rs. 2976/-. It was brought to our notice that said exempt income/dividend is from the shares held by the assessee, for which the assessee had incurred cost of Rs. 4,715/-. It was brought to our notice that no expenses were incurred by the assessee for earning the exempt income. The AO was of the opinion since the assessee had taken certain loans, he made disallowance under Rule 8D of the Rules. We note that the loan expenses were for car loan, business etc and not for purchasing the shares or earning of the exempt income. In such a scenario, we hold that the disallowance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee but the AO has computed the profit on tea purchased on the ratio of the total quantity of Tea Manufactured in place of the tea Manufactured by the Garden using the tea. Assessment orders and Computation of income showing such calculation for AsstYears 2010-11,2011-12 and 2012-1} are enclosed as Annexure-B. It may be pointed out that for the asst. year 2010 - 11 appeal effect of order of CIT(A) has been given for such purpose by the same Assessing Officer. Copy of CIT order in case of assessee for Asst. Year 2010-11 and 2009-10 is enclosed in this respect. 5. As stated in the order by DCIT, the appellant had bought Green Leaf from other growers and manufactured Tea therefrom. The total leaf purchased during the year was 16,30,430Kgs. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 1,23,24,460/-. The Assessing Officer, on completion of the assessment, also charged interest u/s.2348 of the Act The Gross Tax inclusive of Interest, was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 40.48,346/- which should be recalculated." 6. It was brought to our notice that the ld. CIT(A) for the AY 2009-10 had interfered with the order of the AO when he tinkered with the computation regularly followed by assessee and ordered as under:- "6. The fourth ground of appeal is that the AO should have separately computed the respective income of the tea Estates in the state of West Bengal and Assam as was done in the past. The AO has not given any finding in the assessment order as to why he has so computed the income of the appellant. He ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AY 2009-10 has accepted the computation of assessee (refer pages-57 of the P/B). Since we note that the assessee has been consistently following the computation of income separately for tea estates in West Bengal and Assam and computing the total income of tea estates together as per the doctrine of consistency the same ought to have been followed without disturbing the same. For that proposition we refer to the Hon'ble Supreme Court 's decision in RadhasoamiSatsang Vs. CIT reported in (1992) 193 ITR 321 (SC). Therefore, we direct the AO to adopt the pattern of computation as accepted by the department/consistently which was followed by the assessee and allow this ground of appeal. 9. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly all ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
