TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Tribunal upholds CIT(A) decision on excluding non-exempt income investments for disallowance.</h1> <h3>The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cicle-5 (2), Mumbai Versus Prime Property Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd.</h3> The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Cicle-5 (2), Mumbai Versus Prime Property Development Corporation Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues:Only issue is the exclusion of value of investments not yielding exempt income relatable to exempt income under section 14A of the Income Tax Act.Analysis:The appeal by the Revenue challenges the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) regarding the exclusion of the value of investments not yielding exempt income for computing the average value of investments as required for working of disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules. The Revenue raised two grounds questioning the exclusion of such investments and the interpretation of section 14A. The assessee earned dividend income, and the Assessing Officer made disallowances under section 14A read with Rule 8D. The CIT(A) referred to a judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. and restricted the disallowance to investments yielding tax-free income. The total disallowance was reduced significantly. The Tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order as it was in line with the Delhi High Court's decision in Chem Investment. Therefore, the appeal by the Revenue was dismissed.In conclusion, the Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) to exclude investments not yielding exempt income for the purpose of computing disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Tribunal relied on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. to support the exclusion of such investments. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, and the CIT(A)'s order was upheld.
TaxTMI 