9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 1794X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Manufacturing and Export of Insecticides and Agro Chemicals. The return of income for the year under consideration, i.e. A.Y. 2011-12 was filed by it on 22.09.2011 declaring total income of Rs.30,64,53,814/-. While computing the total income of the assessee under the normal provisions of the Act as well as the book profit under section 115JB of the Act vide an order dated 26.03.2013 passed under section 143(3), the following additions, inter alia, were made by the Assessing Officer:- (i) Disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D Rs.8,12,886/- (ii) Excise Duty Refund Rs.5,59,46,935/- (iii) Interest subsidy Rs.43,37,773/- 4. Against the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 143(3), an appeal was preferred by the assessee before the ld. CIT(Appeals) disputing the aforesaid additions made by the Assessing Officer while computing its book profit under section 115JB of the Act as well as its business income under the normal provisions of the Act. After considering the submissions made by the assessee as well as the material available on record, the ld. CIT(Appeals) deleted the additions made by the Assessing Officer on account of excise duty refund and int ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n ITA Nos. 883/KOL/2014 & 1018/KOL/2014, the same has already been decided by the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal by holding that the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D should be restricted to the extent of exempt income vide paragraph no. 29 of its order, which reads as under:- "29. We have heard the submission of the learned counsel for the Assessee. It was brought to our notice that the Hon'ble ITAT, Kolkata in the case of REI Agro Ltd. Vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol-Trib) has held that it is only the investments which yields dividend during the previous year that has to be considered while adopting the average value of investments for the purpose of Rule 8D(2)(ii) & (iii) of the Rules. The aforesaid view of the Tribunal has since been affirmed as correct by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in G.A.No.3581 of 2013 in the appeal against the order of the Tribunal in the case of REI Agro Ltd. (supra). In the light of the admitted factual position that the assessee had earned dividend income of only Rs.8,440/- during the previous year, we are of the view that there can be no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act of any sum beyond Rs.8,440/-. Accordingly the addition mad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ny under section 115JB of the Act, it is observed that this issue is consequential to the issue involved in Ground No. 1 of the assessee's appeal for AY 2011-12, which has been decided by us in the foregoing portion of this order. Following our conclusion drawn in AY 2011-12 on the said issue, we direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D to the extent of exempt dividend income. Ground No. 3 of the assessee's appeal thus is partly allowed. 11. As regards the Revenue's appeal for A.Y. 2011-12 being ITA No. 2080/KOL/2014, it is observed that the solitary issue involved therein relating to the deletion by the ld. CIT(Appeals) of the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of interest subsidy and excise duty refund in computing the income of the assessee under the normal provisions of the Act is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the order dated 08.03.2017 (supra) of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal passed in assessee's own case for AY 2010-11, wherein a similar issue was decided in favour of the assessee vide Paragraphs No. 11 & 12 of its order, which read as under:- "11. The conclusion of the Hon'ble ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... these circumstances, we find no merit in Ground No.2 raised by the revenue". 12. Respectfully following the order of the Tribunal dated 08.03.2017 (supra) in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2010-11 on a similar issue, we uphold the impugned order of the ld. CIT(Appeals) giving relief to the assessee on this issue and dismiss the appeal of the Revenue for A.Y. 2011-12. 13. Now we take up cross appeals for AY 2012-13 in ITA No. 1954/KOL/2014 (assessee's appeal) and ITA No. 2081/KOL/2014 (Revenue's appeal), which are directed against the order of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-XII, Kolkata dated 11.08.2014. 14. After considering the rival submissions and perusing the relevant material available on record, it is observed that the issue involved in Ground No. 1 of the assessee's appeal for AY 2012-13 relating to the disallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D in computing the income of the assessee under the normal provisions of the Act is similar to the one involved in Ground No. 1 of the assessee's appeal for AY 201112, which has already been decided by us in the foregoing portion of this order. Following our conclusion drawn in AY 2011-12 on the similar issue, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
