TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 1887X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... income and as per the judgement of Hon ble Supreme court in Goetz (India) Ltd. [ 2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT ], ld. CIT(A) and Tribunal may admit the additional claim/ground. We want to make it clear that the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in REI Agro Ltd. [ 2013 (9) TMI 156 - ITAT KOLKATA ] wherein it was held that it is only investment which yields dividend during the previous year that has to be considered while adjudicating the average value of investment for the purpose of rule 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) of IT Rules. The aforesaid view of Tribunal has been affirmed as correct by the Hon ble Calcutta High court in GA No. 3581 of 2013 in the appeal against the order of the Tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd. supra ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D should be made in relation to: i) Investment on which no dividend income was received during the year. ii) Strategic Investment made in group companies not for purpose of earning dividend income. The assessee has claimed that though in the return filed by it, an amount of ₹ 62,49,109/- was not claimed u/s 14A read with Rule 8D, actual disallowance should be assessed as ₹ 26,00,022/-. Since the assessee did not file a revise return for its claim, the claim is rejected following the Supreme court decision in Goetze (India) Ltd. 284 ITR 323. 4. Aggrieved by the order of the Assessing Officer the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) who has dismissed the appe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... (for the issue which was not entertained by the Assessing Officer) during the appellate proceedings or before the Tribunal. We note as per the judgment of the Hon ble Supreme Court in Goetz (India) Ltd. 284 ITR 323 the Assessing Officer may admit a new claim provided the assessee s claim it by filing revised return of income and as per the judgement of Hon ble Supreme court in Goetz (India) Ltd. supra, ld. CIT(A) and Tribunal may admit the additional claim/ground. 8. We want to make it clear that the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT, Kolkata in REI Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol-Trib) wherein it was held that it is only investment which yields dividend during the previous year that has to be considered while adjudicating the av ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
