TMI Blog2023 (10) TMI 617X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITAT CHENNAI] Deduction of TDS u/s 194A - As held by [ 2021 (11) TMI 577 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] and the Hon ble High Court vide order dated 21.9.2021 Hon ble Court that the entitlement of interest accruing on the FDs to the assessee would be dependent on the result of the pending Court/CBI proceedings and consequently, till the conclusion of the said court proceedings, the interest accruing on the FD cannot be considered as income for the purpose of deduction of TDS u/s 194A and directed the bank not to deduct TDS on the interest of FDs. However, it cannot be treated as absolving the assessee of its liability to pay tax on the interest accruing on the FD if the petitioner becomes entitled to the same after conclusion of the court proceedings. Being so, in our opinion, the lower authorities has committed an error in bringing the interest accrued on FD which is subject to prohibitory order by CBI Hyderabad into tax in these assessment years under consideration and the same has to be taxed in assessment year when it was actually received by the assessee or right to receive accrued to the assessee - assessee has to pay the tax on the same on actual accrual of right to r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... thana Samudaya in WP No. 562 of 2009. The mines of the assessee are situated in Bellary district of Karnataka, but bordering the neighbouring State of Andhra Pradesh. The CBI, Hyderabad, filed a charge-sheet before the Hon'ble Court of Special Judge for CBI, Hyderabad under section 173 of CRPC against Shri. B. V. Sreenivasa Reddy, Managing Director of M/s. Obulapuram Mining Company Private Limited and others for illegal mining, encroachment of reserved forest area, falsification of documents, conspiracy etc. The Hon'ble CBI Court, Hyderabad has placed prohibitory orders on the following fixed deposits vide orders u/s 102 of CRPC vide letter dated, 11-10-2009 and 13-10-2009 in case No.R.C.1)M)2009: SI. No.' Name of the Bank Amount of Fixed Deposit (In Rs. ) 1. SBI, Kudithini Branch, Bellary. 122,55,75,375/- 2. SBI, Kudithini Branch, Bellary. 80,71,509/- 3. ING Vysya Bank, Bellary. 2,31,63,856/- 3.1. In pursuance of the same, the banks h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nterest assessed by AO (i). 2014-15 11,51,66,881 1,08,76,954 10,42,89,927 (ii). 2015-16 11,47,72,093 1,14,77,226 10,32,94,857 3.3. The learned AO has based his decision on the following grounds: (i). The assessee company has been maintaining its accounts under the mercantile system of accounting regularly and the income has been offered to tax on accrual basis up to the AY; 2013-14, whereas the Hon'ble CBI Court had placed the prohibitory order in AY; 2010-11 itself. Hence consistent with the method of accounting followed in the earlier assessment years up to 2013-14, the assessee, should have accounted the interest income and declared it to tax in the subject assessment year also. (ii). The prohibitory order of the Hon'ble Court only restrains the assessee from operating the accounts, but the assessee continues to hold the right over the contents of the account. Hence the interest income has accrued to the assessee in the subject assessment year itself and accordingly it is as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m the use by others of enterprise resources yielding interest, royalties and dividends should only be recognised when no significant uncertainty as to measurability or collectability exists. (Emphasis added) 4.1 He submitted that as per the AS-9, interest income should not be recognised if there is significant uncertainty as to its receipt. The source of interest income are the fixed deposits and the fixed deposits itself are placed under attachment. When the source itself is attached and liable to be recovered by the orders of the Court, there is no certainty of accrual of interest income emanating from the source i.e., the fixed deposits. It is settled law that the revenue recognition is to be postponed if there is uncertainty of receipt. The Hon ble Hyderabad Tribunal in ACIT vs. Hill County Properties Limited in ITA No.1644/HYD/2014 (URO) cited in ACIT vs. Medravathi Agro Farms (P.) Ltd. [2015] 63 taxmann.com 274 (Hyderabad - Trib.) referred to AS-9 and held that: where the ability of the assessee for ultimate collection with reasonable certainty is lacking at the time of raising any claim, revenue recognition is postponed to the extent of uncertainty involved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f income on the loans advanced to two Firms where even the recovery of the principal amount was in doubt and the mercantile system of accounting followed by the assessee could not be relied upon to tax the interest income. The Revenue took the matter before the Hon ble Supreme Court in SLP and the same came to be dismissed vide SLP (Civil) No.2806 of 1981 . 4.4 He referred to the decision of the Hon ble High Court of Allahabad in the case Rani Bhawani Devi vs. CIT [1962] 46 ITR 973 (ALL.). The Hon ble High Court agreed with the view of the assessing officer that the interest on the fixed deposits was assessable only in the assessment year, 1948-49 where the dispute regarding the title on succession of the deceased person was settled by compromise decree. 4.5 He submitted that the Larger Bench of the Hon ble Supreme Court explained the basic concept of income in its landmark decision, way-back in 1954, reported in E.D. Sassoon Co. [1954] 26 ITR 27 (SC) . In summary, it held as under: It is clear therefore that income may accrue to the assessee without the actual receipt of the same. If the assessee acquires the right to receive the income, the income can be sa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... He submitted that indisputably, the assessees is not in receipt of interest income and there is no certainty whether the assessee would be entitled to receive the interest at all. If the source is attached and the accrual itself is obstructed curtailing the right to receive pending a decision in the Court, there is no accrual of income. If at all the assessee acquires the right to receive the interest income in any particular assessment year, the assessee would duly recognise it in the books of account and declare it to tax. This would ensure that the income is taxed and the Revenue would receive its legitimate taxes in that year of accrual, where right to receive the income would get vested in the assessee. On the other hand, if the interest income is taxed in the subject assessment year in spite of the significant uncertainty of its accrual and receipt, the assessee would be prejudiced and put to irretrievable loss. 4.10 In the above-mentioned case i.e., Balbir Singh Maini (Supra) , the Hon ble Supreme Court observed that the above passage from the decision in Shoorji Vallabhdas Co. (Supra) was cited with approval in Morvi Industries Limited (Supra) . The obser ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ing investigation of criminal charges. In the case of the former, there is obviously no obstruction to accrual and right to receive is not curtailed. In the case of garnishee Notice as in section 226(3) of the Act, the assessing officer steps into the shoes of an assessee and recovers what is due and payable to the assessee by debtor/bank towards the existing liability. Reference is invited to decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Administrator, UTI vs. B.M. Malani (2007) 164 Taxman 463 (SC)/(2008) 296 ITR 31 (SC), wherein it was held that the assessing officer is entitled to recover only the amount which the assessee was otherwise entitled to receive. 4.12 As submitted earlier, the learned assessing officer has also relied on the decision in Morvi Industries Limited (Supra) , but arrived at a different conclusion that interest income had accrued to the assessee, who holds right over the asset even though the FDs are under the prohibitory orders, as long as it is not appropriated otherwise in pursuance of order of the Court Para 5.4 of page 9 of the impugned assessment order (AY 2014-15). 4.13 In fact the learned AO has extracted the relevant por ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed on the plea that in view of the restraint order of the Court, the assessee had no right to receive the dividend during the year under consideration. However the assessing officer did not accept the view of the assessee and assessed it as income of the year mainly on the ground that (a). the income had accrued to the assessee in spite of the restraint order of the Court, and; (b). the assessee itself had accounted the income in its books of account and was also admitted as income in the return of income filed. 4.16 On appeal, the Appellate Commissioner upheld the addition. But on further appeal the Tribunal held that because of the restraint order of the Court, there was no right accruing to the assessee to receive the income and accordingly the amount could not be treated as its income for the assessment year under consideration. On further appeal by the Revenue, the Hon ble Court held (para 5): Admittedly, the assessee had purchased the shares concerned from Jaipuria Brothers Limited and the restraint order was passed in an execution instituted by the receiver of the Estate of Sara Bhai Jai Singh Bhai against Jaipuria Brothers Limited and the court by an inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... m, Under Secretary to the Government of Gujarat wrote a letter to the assessee advising it to maintain the status quo for the rates to the consumers for a certain period. The dispute mainly centred around whether enhanced charges already collected by the company was its income as the assessee itself had accounted for the charges in its books of account, even though litigation was pending. The Hon ble Court vide para 14 of its order held: 14. The question whether there was real accrual of income to the assessee- company in respect of the enhanced charges for supply of electricity has to be considered by taking the probability or improbability of realisation in a realistic manner. If the matter is considered in this light, it is not possible to hold that there was real accrual of income to the assessee-company in respect of the enhanced charges for supply of electricity which were added by the ITO while passing the assessment orders in respect of the assessment years under consideration. The AAC was right in deleting the said addition made by the ITO and the Tribunal had rightly held that the claim at the increased rates as made by the assessee- company on the basis of which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court that the assessee does not have not any enforceable right against the interest or the principal amount. In the case of the assessee, the Hon ble Court has ordered the Bank not to deal with the fixed deposits or the interest thereon and maintain the status quo until further orders. In view of the IDENTICAL facts, it is submitted that there is no accrual of income and the mercantile system of accounting followed by the assessee does not mandate to recognise such income. 4.23 In view of the above, the ld. A.R. for the assessee submitted that the addition of interest as income accruing is against the concept of income and the principles of accrual of income and therefore, liable to be deleted. 5. The ld. D.R. submitted that there is no doubt that the interest income accrued in the case of assessee. That means as per the provisions of section 5 of the Act interest accrued is the income of the assessee in the year in which it is accrued. Further the deposits in the bank accounts of the assessee are placed under Prohibitory Order. But it had not affected accruing interest. It is also clear from the submissions of the assessee that the 5 years period of prohibitory ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ritory before the beginning of such year. Thus, it is not necessary that the income should be received by the assessee only. However, all receipts do not constitute income and do not come within the ambit of the Act. If income not received but accrued to the assessee, then it is taxable vice-versa if the income received but not accrued it is not taxable. In other words, though there is actually or constructively received but accrued then it is deemed to be received by the assessee. Receipt or accrual itself is not sufficient to bring a receipt within the clutches of taxation. In order to bring a receipt into taxation, it should be income and it ought to have been accrued to the assessee in the relevant assessment year. The question as to when exactly an assessee is said to have received the income or profits has to be largely determined with reference to the system of accounting employed by him. Where according to the method followed by the assessee, the same was accrued during the year of account, and it seems, that it would be brought into account of the income as soon as right to receive is accrued to assessee. In these circumstances, on actual accrual should be considered only ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... character of the receipt offered as a trading receipt or as an income should not be based on the name given to the amount received by the assessee in his books of accounts because in law the real nature and character of the transaction must be determined in the light of treatment of the contract and the rights and obligations of the parties flowing therefrom unguided by the nomenclature of the transaction. For this purpose, rely on the judgement of Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of National Cement Mines Industries Ltd. Vs. CIT (42 ITR 69) (SC). 6.3 While determining the nature of the receipt as being a trading receipt taxable as income from business or profession or otherwise, one should be guided by the terms of the agreement entered into between the parties. Revenue authorities cannot ignore the genuine agreement between the assessee and the concerned parties from whom the said amount has been received. In the absence of any situation or allegation or collusion, the revenue cannot resort to any attempt to rewrite the agreement with a view to impose the levy of tax shall be when the transaction between the parties are at arm s length For this proposition we rely on the ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly to the reference of legal position of the recipient. Thus, the question whether a particular receipt is in the nature of income or not and would be liable to tax or not, primarily for the AO to decide but having regard to the facts and circumstances f the case and in accordance with law. Further, in the case of CIT Vs. Associated Cables Pvt. Ltd.(286 ITR 596) the Bombay High Court held that-- The question of law sought to be raised in this appeal is as to whether the retention money could be considered to be the income of the assessee in the year in which the amount was retained. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal has referred to a judgement of the Tribunal in Associated Cables P. Ltd. V. Deputy CIT (1994) 206 ITR (AT) 48 (Bom). Mr. Sathe appearing for the respondent has, however, drawn our attention to two judgements, viz., of the Calcutta High Court and the Madras High Court. The Calcutta High court judgement is reported in CIT Vs. Simplex Concrete Piles (India) P. Ltd. (1989) 179 ITR 8. A Division Bench of the Calcutta High Court in that matter has held that the payment of retention money in the case of contract is deferred and is contingent on satisfactory completion of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and arguments we find that the issue is covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs Simplex Concrete Piles (India) Pvt. Ltd. 1989 179 ITR 8 Gal, wherein it was held as follows:- Section 5 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Income - Accrual of - Assessment years 1965-66 and 1966-67 - Assessee- Company was carrying on construction business and followed mercantile system of accounting - As per terms of contracts entered into with various parties assessee was entitled to get 90 per cent of payment in first instance when work was done and remaining 10 or 5 per cent, as case may be, was to be paid later on after submitting certificates from architects/engineers, removal of defects, payment of damages, etc. - Assessee was crediting 100 per cent of job value in past years but from assessment year 1965-66, it had started practice of crediting only 90 per cent value for work done after deducting retention money -Whether it could be said that on date of submission of bills assessee had no right to receive entire amount on completion of work and retention money did not accrue to it on such date but on later date in accorda ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 29.11.2014 it was on the basis of profit as per the P L Account without considering the deduction made by parties (customers) on account of retention money. However, the assessee on proper application of the legal and factual position realised that company s real income is much less than the revenue booked in the account and hence, revised return was filed on 17.03.2016 claiming deduction of the retention money debited by the parties during the year amounting to Rs. 142,53,74,710/-. It was also brought to the notice of the AO that as per the contract between the parties certain percentage of the bills raised as per agreement can be retained by the contractee party as retention money which would be payable only after successful completion of the entire contract after it being certified by the party and after fulfilment of certain pre-determined conditions mentioned in the contract. Thus, it was explained to the AO that as per the accounting practise followed by the party though a part of the bill amount was retained by the contractee party and would be paid afterwards on agreed conditions, the assessee in its books of account has booked the entire revenue as and when the bills were ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed Balance Sheet under the head Revenue from operations. The assessee maintained books of account on mercantile basis and the revenue was recognized on the basis of progressive partial completion of particular project and the bills were raised accordingly. As per the contract between the parties there were clauses in the contract that the contractee shall retain specified percentage of the billed amount till successful completion of the entire project. The ld. AR drew our attention to the contract with M/s. Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd. wherein it is stipulated that the balance 10% of the erection process component (excluding processed component) for survey shall be paid after successful commissioning of the transmission line and issuance of taking over certificate. So, the final payment would be given as per the contract after the successful commissioning of the transmission line and issuance of taking over certificate by the Power Grid meaning the retention money would be given only after successful commissioning and after issuance of the taking over certificate. According to the assessee, as per such duly executed contract entered into between the parties, the contracte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... had the right to withhold certain percentage of the consideration till the conclusion of the project and only after certification of concluded projects the retained portion of the amounts are disbursed finally which may be in the succeeding assessment years and is contingent upon the terms and conditions of the contract. We also note that the AO has not disputed the amount which has been retained by the contractees. In such a scenario, merely because the assessee had booked the income in this year without actual receipt of it, cannot be chargeable to tax as per the Act. The reasons given by the AO to disallow the claim of the assessee cannot be sustained and was rightly repelled by the Ld. CIT(A) whose view to accept the claim of assessee is based on the accepted judicial precedents laid down by the Hon ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Simplex Concrete Piles (supra); Hon ble Gujarat High Court in Anup Engineering Ltd. (supra); Hon ble Bombay High court in CIT Vs. Associated Cables P. Ld. (supra) and Hon ble Madras High Court in CIT Vs. Ignifluid Boilers (I) Ltd. (2006) 283 ITR 295 (Mad). We hold that in the factual circumstances especially as per the terms of contract betwe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CBI and the said proceedings initiated against the petitioner are still pending adjudication. In this contest, it is relevant to quote Section 194A of the IT Act, which reads as sunder : 194A. Interest other than Interest on securities . (1) Any person, not being an individual or a Hindu undivided family, who is responsible for paying to a resident any income by way of interest other than income by way of interest on securities, shall at the time of credit of such income to the account of the payee or at the time of payment thereof in cash or by issue of a cheque or draft or by any other mode, whichever is earlier, deduct income-tax thereon at the rates in force : Provided that an individual or a Hindu undivided family, whose total sales, gross receipts or turnover from the business or profession carried on by him exceed the monetary limits specified under clause (1) or clause (b) of Sections 44AB during the financial year immediately preceding the financial year in which such interest is credited or paid, shall be liable to deduct income-tax under this section. Explanation.- For the purpose of this section, where any income by way of interest as aforesaid is credi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r paid, shall be liable to deduct income-tax under this section. Explanation.--For the purposes of this section, where any income by way of interest as aforesaid is credited to any account, whether called Interest payable account or Suspense account or by any other name, in the books of account of the person liable to pay such income, such crediting shall be deemed to be credit of such income to the account of the payee and the provisions of this section shall apply accordingly. 18. In terms of Section 194A of the Act, the petitioner would, in the normal course, be obliged to deduct tax at source in respect of any credit or payment of interest on deposits made with it. However, in the present case, the question that needs to be addressed is whether Section 194A of the Act contemplates deduction of tax in a situation where the assessee is not ascertainable and the person in whose name the interest is credited is also, admittedly, not a person liable to pay tax under the Act. 19. The Registrar General of this Court is, clearly, not the recipient of the income represented by interest that accrues on the deposits made in his/her name. The Registrar General is also n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n is recovery of tax without the corresponding income being assessed in the hands of any assessee. The ultimate recipient of the funds from the FD would also not be able to avail of the credit of TDS. It is apparent that in absence of an ascertainable assessee the machinery of recovering tax by deduction of tax at source breaks down because it does not aid the charge of tax under Section 4 of the Act but takes a form of a separate levy, independent of other provisions of the Act. This is, clearly, impermissible. 22. The impugned circular proceeds on an assumption that the litigant depositing the money is the account holder with the petitioner bank and/or is the recipient of the income represented by the interest accruing thereon. This assumption is fundamentally erroneous as the litigant who is asked to deposit the money in Court ceases to have any control or proprietary right over those funds. The amount deposited vests with the Court and the depositor ceases to exercise any dominion over those funds. It is also not necessary that the litigant who deposits the money would be the ultimate recipient of those funds. As indicated earlier, the person who is ultimately granted the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sary directions in this regard are to be issued against the respondent Nos.3 to 5; it is needless to state that the directions to be issued to the respondent Nos.3 to 5-Bank not to deduct TDS on the interest on the FDs, cannot be treated as absolving petitioner of its liability to pay tax on the interest accruing on the FD if the petitioner becomes entitled to the same after conclusion of the Court proceedings. 12. In the result, I pass the following: ORDER The petition is hereby allowed. ii. The respondent Nos.3 to 5/Banks are directed not to deduct the TDS in respect of the interest arising/accruing on FDs of the petitioner lying with the respondent Nos.3 to 5/Banks till conclusion of the proceedings initiated by the 6th respondent-CBI against the petitioner. iii. It is however made clear that the alleged liability of the petitioner, if any, to pay taxes in respect of the interest accruing on the said FDs shall a rise after conclusion of the said proceedings. iv. It is made clear that the present order passed will not affect any TDS already deducted by the respondent Nos.3 to 5/Banks prior to interim order dated 09.09.2019 passed by this Court. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nion, the lower authorities has committed an error in bringing the interest accrued on FD which is subject to prohibitory order by CBI Hyderabad into tax in these assessment years under consideration and the same has to be taxed in assessment year when it was actually received by the assessee or right to receive accrued to the assessee. In other words, the assessee has to pay the tax on the same on actual accrual of right to receive this impugned interest by the assessee in any assessment year and not in these assessment years. Accordingly, this ground of appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. 9. Next ground in ITA No.15/Bang/2019 in assessment year 2015-16 is with regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 9.1 The ld. A.R. submitted that the learned AO has disallowed an amount of Rs. 62,19,040/- as expenditure related to exempt income applying section 14A r.w. Rule 8D without considering that the assessee had sufficient reserves surpluses and there was no investment cost by way of interest. It was further contended that the investments in sister concerns are made for strategic purposes only and consequently, section 14A had no application. SURPLUS FUNDS. 9. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... capital gains. Hence section 14A is not applicable. It is therefore submitted by the ld. A.R. that the addition is unsustainable for the reason that (a). Satisfaction is not recorded before applying the said section 14 and Rule 8D as is seen from the impugned assessment order. (b). The investment is strategic and beyond the scope of section 14A, and; (c). On merits, the investment is made out of surplus funds and there is no cost involved. 10. The ld. D.R. submitted that as long as an exempted income earned, the expenditure incurred was attributable to earning such exempted income had to be disallowed u/s 14A of the Act. According to the ld. D.R., assessee had made various investments in various Government Securities, Mutual Funds, Equity investments and other Bonds to the extent of Rs. 128,11,67,076/- out of which income earned on investment at Rs. 120,64,48,347/- was exempted. The assessee has received exempted income of Rs. 94,12,976/- during the previous year, therefore, the ld. AO invoked the provisions of section 14A r.w.s. 80D of the I.T. Rules. The ld. AO after considering the working of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act pointed out that while computing th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s context, it is important to refer to the judgment of the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s.Marg Limited v. CIT in Tax Case Appeal Nos.41 to 43 220 of 2017 (judgment dated 30.09.2020). The Hon ble Madras High Court followed the judgment of the Hon ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pargathi Krishna Gramin Bank v. JCIT[(2018) 95 taxman.com 41 (Kar.)]. In the case considered by the Hon ble Madras High Court, the assessee therein had made voluntarily disallowance u/s 14A of the I.T.Act more than the dividend income earned and the Tribunal confirmed the disallowance made u/s 14A of the I.T.Act. However, the Hon ble Madras High Court held that the disallowance u/s 14A of the I.T.Act cannot exceed the exempt income earned during the relevant assessment year. The relevant finding of the Hon ble Madras High Court reads as follow:- 20. Before parting, we may also note with reference to the Table of disallowance voluntarily made by the Assessee, which is part of the Paper Book before us for the four assessment years in question. In the Table quoted in the beginning of the order, shows that the Assessee himself computed and offered the disallowance beyond the exempted ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... resort to the computation method under Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. (underlining supplied) 3.7 In view of the above judgment of the Hon ble Madras High Court in the case of M/s.Marg Limited v. CIT (supra), it is clear that the disallowance u/s 14A of the I.T.Act cannot exceed the exempt income earned during the relevant assessment year irrespective whether larger amount was disallowed by the assessee u/s 14A of the I.T.Act while filing the return of income. Therefore, the AO is directed to restrict the disallowance u/s 14A of the I.T.Act to Rs. 27,37,47,187. 3.8 In the result, ground No.II raised by the assessee is allowed. 11.1 In view of the above discussion, we hold that disallowance should be restricted to the amount of exempted income earned by the assessee after considering only the exempted income yielding investments, so as to apply the formula contained in Rule 8D. Accordingly, the issue is restored to the file of ld. AO for fresh consideration. This ground of assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes. 12. Next ground in ITA No.15/Bang/2019 in assessment year 2015-16 is with regard to computation of income u/s 115JB of the Act. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
