1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule β now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available


2. New: βIn Favour Ofβ filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws β
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Revenue's Appeal Dismissed by ITAT Kolkata for A.Yr. 2007-08 - 1% Dividend Income Expenditure Disallowed</h1> The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the order of CIT(A)-Central-III, Kolkata for A.Yr. 2007-08. The Tribunal ... Disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D - Held that:- Since the assessment year involved in this appeal is relating to A.Yr. 2007-08 as per the decision of the Honβble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej and Boyce Mfg. Pvt. Ltd. (2010 (8) TMI 77 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT) relied upon by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, Rule 8D is not applicable in the assessment year under consideration. This Tribunal has been taking a consistent view of sustaining the disallowance u/s 14A at 1% of the dividend income. Accordingly we direct the AO to disallow 1% of the dividend income as expenditure relevant to earning of dividend income. We order accordingly. The Appellate Tribunal ITAT Kolkata dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the order of CIT(A)-Central-III, Kolkata for A.Yr. 2007-08. The issue was about disallowance u/s 14A of the IT Act read with Rule 8D of IT Rules. The Tribunal directed the AO to disallow 1% of the dividend income as expenditure relevant to earning of dividend income, as Rule 8D was not applicable for the assessment year. The appeal of the revenue was dismissed on 07.03.2012.