TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 231X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... AY HIGH COURT] deleting the addition made by the assessing officer then again making an enhancement on a different pretext of estoppel or offering concession by the assessee. This is on the cusp of contempt of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court, and not at all sustainable. Accordingly, we set aside the orders of ld. CIT(A) and delete the addition. - ITA No. 3840/Mum/2019 - - - Dated:- 5-1-2021 - SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA , AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI , JM Appellant by : Shri Nimesh Vora Respondent by : Shri Jeetendra Kumar ORDER Per Shamim Yahya, A. M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-20, Mumbai ( ld.CIT(A) for short) dated 29.03.2019 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by a sum of ₹ 51,35,105/- was passed without affording proper opportunity to the appellant and is contrary to the principles of natural justice. 2. The appellant submits that the Assessing Officer be directed: (i) to delete the disallowance of expenses amounting to a sum of ₹ 51,35,105/-; and to modify the assessment in accordance with the provisions of the Act. 3. Brief facts of the case are that in the course of the assessment proceedings, the AO found from the assessee's balance sheet that the assessee was holding investments income from which does not or shall not form part of the total income (hereinafter in this order such investments shall be referred to as specified assets ). The AO also found that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s placed in this regard on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Delite Enterprises (ITA No. 110 of 2009). 4.3.2 I, therefore, hold that the disallowance made u/s. 14A read with Rule 8D is not sustainable. Accordingly, I direct the A.O. to delete the disallowance made u/s.14A read with Rule 8D(2). 5. Thereafter, he proposed an enhancement on the ground that the assessee has suo motto disallowance of ₹ 51,35,104/-. In this regard, he observed as under: 5.4.1 I find from Para 2 of the statements of facts filed along with Form No. 35 that the appellant had itself admitted that it had incurred expenses which consisted of Salary of Mat department of ₹ 51,35,105/- which worked out on rational ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
