TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 293X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... [ 2018 (3) TMI 805 - SUPREME COURT] referred to above. Therefore, we find that the Tribunal was right in rejecting the appeal filed by the Revenue. - Decided against revenue. - ITAT/21/2022 IA NO:GA/1/2022 - - - Dated:- 4-7-2022 - HON'BLE JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND HON'BLE JUSTICE BIVAS PATTANAYAK Ms. S. Das De, Adv., for appellant/petitioner Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv.; Mr. A. Sen, Adv., for respondent ORDER The Court: This appeal by the Revenue, filed under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act for the sake of brevity), for a direction against the order dated November 9, 2021, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, A-Bench, Kolkata, in ITA No.499/Kol/2020 for t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Kesoram Industries Ltd. -vs- Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax, reported in [2022] 441 itr 648(Cal). The operative portion of the said decision reads as follows: The law on the issue is no longer res integra and we are gruided by the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC). Paragraphs 34 and 41 would be of relevance to the case on hand, which is quoted hereinbelow for better appreciation (page 665 of 402 ITR): 34. Having clarified the aforesaid position, the first and foremost issue that falls for consideration is as to whether the dominant purpose test, which is pressed into service by the assessees would apply while interpreting section 14A o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ture is outside the ambit of the applicability of section 14A... The theory of apportionment of expenditure between taxable and non-taxable has, in principle, been now widened under section 14A''.... 41. Having regard to the language of section 14A(2) of the Act, read with rule 8D of the Rules, we also make it clear that before applying the theory of apportionment, the Assessing Officer needs to record satisfaction that having regard to the kind of the assessee, suo motu disallowance under section 14A was not correct. It will be in those cases where the assessee in his return has himself apportioned but the Assessing Officer was not accepting the said apportionment. In that eventuality, it will have to record its satisfaction ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see raised the same, though the grounds have been noted. The Tribunal has not rendered any decision on the said point but granted partial relief to the assessee with regard to the interest alone. We also take note of the decision of this court in the case of CIT v. Ashish jhunjhunwala reported in [2015] (12) TMI 905(Cal), and the decision in Pr. CIT v. Britannia Industries limited I.T.A.T/45/2017 dated July 19, 2018. It was pointed out that the assessee has to make a claim (including a claim that no expenditure was incurred) with regard to the expenditure incurred for earning income which is not chargeable to tax. Such a claim has to be examined by the Assessing Officer and only if an objective satisfaction is arrived at by the Assessing Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
