TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 280X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accounts of assessee. On perusal of finding of AO regarding recording of non-satisfaction with regard to accounts of assessee relating to exempt income, we do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in holding that the AO recorded its satisfaction of the impugned order. Therefore, the submissions of AR are rejected and ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is dismissed. Seeking direction to AO to restrict the disallowance u/r 8D concerning the investments yielded exempt income - Disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) to an extent of Rs.1,78,490/- is not maintainable. Therefore, the order of CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) on account of interest expenditure and to that extent the order of CIT(A) i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(A) through Income Tax port. The delay involved was not intentional nor deliberate but due to old age and physical limitation of the Director of assessee by name Ashok Nandlal Baser. The ld. AR submits that the assessee was in compliance of all the procedures but however due to old age of Director the delay of 972 days crept unfortunately. Further, he submits that the age of said Director is around 80 years and contesting the similar issue for A.Y. 2009-10 and drew our attention to the order dated 17-05-2018 in ITA No. 176/PUN/2016 in assessee s own case at page 8 of the paper book. The ld. AR argued that the assessee has no deliberate intention in filing the appeal belatedly but however the age concerning of Director the delay of 972 day ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee did not apportion any expenditure relating to the exempt income and not satisfied with the claim of assessee that no expenses were incurred to earn its exempt income, proceeded to work out by applying Rule 8D, disallowed expenditure of Rs.1,78,490/- and Rs.5,40,395/- under Rule 8D(ii) (iii), respectively. The AO clearly recorded its non-satisfaction with regard to accounts of assessee in para 4 of the assessment order. The CIT(A) confirmed the view of AO recording of non-satisfaction regarding the accounts of assessee. On perusal of finding of AO regarding recording of non-satisfaction with regard to accounts of assessee relating to exempt income, I do not find any infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in holding that the AO rec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... le of AO for computation of disallowance concerning the investments which yielded exempt income. I note that the AO did not examine the said disallowance on this aspect and proceeded to disallow at 0.5% on an average value of investments concerning the first day and last day of previous year to an extent of Rs.10,80,79,007/-. It is settled principle to restrict the disallowance to those investments earned dividend income. Therefore, following the same I direct the AO to compute the disallowance taking into consideration those investments which yielded exempt income. The assessee is liberty to file evidence, if any, in this regard. Thus, alternative ground No. 3 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. 10. In the result, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
