TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1832X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l Fund (Growth Plan) is taxable when the dividend is received and also the capital gains is attracted for the gain received on sale of these investments. AO should also consider as to whether investment in foreign subsidiary company is also taxable or not. In case, the return from these investments are taxable, the question of applying disallowance under section 14A does not arise. The Assessing Officer should examine all these aspects and decide the issue in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity to the Assessee. - ITA NO. 3057/MUM/2015, ITA NO. 3058/MUM/2015, ITA NO. 3223/MUM/2015, ITA NO. 3224/MUM/2015 - - - Dated:- 29-3-2017 - SHRI RAJENDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER For the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Assessee for earning such exempt income. The Ld. Counsel further submits that on identical facts, the Co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal for the immediate preceding assessment year i.e. 2009-10 in ITA No.754/Mum/2013 has been decided in favour of the Assessee and restored for fresh consideration. A copy of the order is placed on record. 3. The Ld. Counsel further submits that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) sustained the disallowance to the expenditure of ₹ 21,82,475/- for the assessment year 2010-11 and ₹ 35,18,492/- for the assessment year 2011-12 being the expenditure with respect to investments made in HDFC (dividend plan). The Ld. Counsel further submits that the Ld. CIT (Appeals) deleted the disallowance in respect of the e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 4459/Mum/2012) on identical sets of facts held that Rule 8D(iii) should not be applied as investments made by the assessee is mainly in schemes of Reliance Mutual Fund and group concern which does not requires incurrence of any major expenditure as these investment are driven by the central business policy and strategy. 5. Further reliance was placed on the following decisions of Mumbai Bench of ITAT:- - Garware Wall Ropes Limited vs. Addl. CIT (I.T.A.No.4957/Mum/2012). - JM financial Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (I.T.A. No.4521/Mum/2012). - Interglobe Enterprises Ltd. vs. DCIT (I.T.A. No.1580/Del./2013). 6. We have considered the rival contentions and the judicial pronouncements cited at bar according to which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
