Revenue appeal allowed for statistical purposes, issues remanded to Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, with all issues being restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration in accordance with the Tribunal's directions.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
3. Disallowance on account of provision for diminution in market value of stock-in-trade.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The first issue pertains to the deletion of a disallowance of Rs. 3,92,60,000/- made under Section 14A of the Act. The assessee, a Non-Banking Financial Company (NBFC), received dividend income and interest on bonds, both claimed as exempt. The Assessing Officer (AO) computed a disallowance of Rs. 426.85 lakhs under Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, which included Rs. 392.62 lakhs under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and Rs. 34.25 lakhs under Rule 8D(2)(iii). The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii), citing that the securities were held as stock-in-trade and thus no interest could be attributed to their acquisition. The CIT(A) also noted that the assessee had sufficient interest-free funds to cover the investments. However, the Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Maxopp Investment Ltd., held that expenses must be apportioned between exempt and non-exempt income. The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO for reconsideration, directing the assessee to provide details of investments and funds.

2. Disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The second issue involves the deletion of a disallowance of Rs. 30,61,000/- under Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The AO disallowed the interest paid on short-term borrowings used for acquiring equity shares held as stock-in-trade, arguing that the dividend income from these shares was exempt. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance, stating that the interest expenditure was related to the business of the assessee. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Maxopp Investment Ltd., held that interest expenses must be apportioned between exempt dividend income and taxable trading income. The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO for reconsideration, directing the assessee to provide details of the apportionment of interest expenses.

3. Disallowance on account of provision for diminution in market value of stock-in-trade:
The third issue concerns the deletion of a disallowance of Rs. 6,56,24,600/- on account of provision for diminution in market value of stock-in-trade. The AO disallowed the provision, considering it an unascertained liability. The CIT(A) allowed the provision, referencing previous decisions that such provisions are allowable if the stock is valued at cost or market value, whichever is lower. The Tribunal agreed that the assessee is allowed to value its stock at cost or market value, but noted that it was unclear whether the provision was made within the trading account or outside it. The Tribunal restored the issue to the AO for verification from the assessee's books and records.

Conclusion:
The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes, with all issues being restored to the AO for fresh consideration in accordance with the Tribunal's directions. The order was pronounced in the open court on 1st May, 2020.

---