Tribunal Upholds Taxpayer's Claim on Interest Expenses, Aligns with Supreme Court Precedent; Dismisses Revenue Appeals.

The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, upholding the Ld.CIT(A)'s decisions on both issues. For the disallowance under Sec. 36(1)(iii), the Tribunal allowed the interest expenses, aligning with the completed contract method and the Supreme Court's precedent. Regarding Sec. 14A and Rule 8D, the Tribunal sustained the deletion of interest disallowance due to surplus funds and directed the AO to consider only investments generating exempt income for disallowance computation. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals and partially allowed the assessee's cross objections, ensuring adherence to legal precedents and principles of tax law.

---

---

Issues:
1. Deletion of disallowance made u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act for A.Ys. 2013-14 and 2014-15.
2. Disallowance made u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D of I.T. Rules for A.Ys. 2013-14 and 2014-15.

Analysis:
1. Deletion of disallowance u/s. 36(1)(iii) of the Act:
- The issue was decided in favor of the assessee by the Tribunal in an earlier case.
- The Tribunal held that interest expenses claimed by the assessee should be allowed in the year incurred.
- The Tribunal followed the completed contract method, directing the AO to allow interest claimed by the assessee.
- The decision was supported by the Hon'ble Supreme Court's judgment in Taparia Tools case.
- The Tribunal upheld the Ld.CIT(A)'s order, rejecting the grounds raised by the Revenue.

2. Disallowance made u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D of I.T. Rules:
- The Assessing Officer computed disallowance under Rule 8D for A.Ys. 2013-14 and 2014-15.
- The Ld.CIT(A) deleted interest disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and restricted disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) to exempt income earned.
- The Ld.CIT(A) followed the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court and directed deletion of interest disallowance.
- The Tribunal sustained the deletion of interest disallowance due to the surplus funds held by the assessee.
- Regarding disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii), the Tribunal directed the AO to consider only investments yielding exempt income for computing the disallowance.
- The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeals and partially allowed the cross objections filed by the assessee.

In conclusion, the appellate tribunal upheld the decisions of the Ld.CIT(A) in both issues, ruling in favor of the assessee. The judgment provided detailed reasoning based on legal precedents and applicable rules, ensuring a fair and just outcome in line with established principles of tax law.

---