9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1492X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeals) ['CIT(A)'] erred on facts and in law in confirming action of the assessing officer in making disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 ('the Rules'), albeit restricting the disallowance to Rs. 2,33,95,428 alleging the same to be incurred for earning exempt dividend income. 1.1 That the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in holding that investment in unquoted shares were made during the year substantially out of the borrowed funds, without appreciating that the appellant had earned dividend income of Rs. 2,33,95,428 from mutual funds which were made from internal accruals and equity available with the appellant. 1.2 That the CIT(A) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion about the correctness of the claim of the appellant in respect of the expenditure incurred for earning the said income. 1.9 Without prejudice, that the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in, inadvertently, considering the amount of interest expenses at Rs. 7,86,55,443/- as against Rs. 2,08,15,484/-. 1.10 Without prejudice, that the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in incorrectly computing the average value of total assets at Rs. 9,03,94,78,284 instead of the correct amount of Rs. 8,26,06,52,951. 1.11 Without prejudice, that the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in incorrectly computing the amount of expenditure allegedly attributed to earning of exempt income at Rs. 4,43,46,901, albeit restricting it to Rs. 2,33,95,428, by applying ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... olution Plan/Process has been accepted by the NCLT. At this juncture, we refer to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ghanshyam Manz Retails Pvt. Ltd. Mishra and Sons Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Edelweiss Asset Reconstruction Co. Ltd. reported in (2021) 126 Taxmann.com 132 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has considered a situation wherein, the resolution plan was approved by the adjudicating authority under Section 31(1) of the IBC Code. Hon'ble Supreme Court observed that, once the resolution plan was drawn, the claim as provided in the resolution plan stood frozen, and will be binding on the corporate debtor, its employee, its members, creditors, Central Government and any State Government or legal authority, guarantor and other stak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
