2012 (9) TMI 159

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....paragraph 4 (b), (c), (d), (e), (g), (k), (l) (only partly insofar as it relates to rent but not insofar as it relates to interest) (m), (n) and (o). However, question (n) is reframed as under :- "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble ITAT are justified in law in holding that turnover attributable to sales of items sold only locally is to be excluded for the purpose of calculation of total turnover for the purpose of deduction under section 80HHC(3) of the Income Tax Act ? " 3. The appeal is dismissed insofar as it relates to the questions sought to be raised in paragraph 4 (a) and (l) (only partly insofar as it relates to interest but not insofar as it relates to rent). 4. The order thus far i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....to making of investments and not for business activity of the Assessee Company ?" Re. : Question (f) 5. It is admitted that in Income Tax Appeal No.690 of 2007 filed in this Court, the appellant sought to raise a similar issue in question (e). The same was dismissed by a judgment dated 5.8.2011. As noted by the CIT (A), even during the previous years, it had been found that no part of interest was attributable to earning income from dividend, as the respondent had sufficient funds for making the said investments. The Tribunal also upheld the order of the CIT (A). 6. The appellate authorities came to a finding of fact which do not raise a substantial question of law. Re. : Question (h) 7. The issue is covered by our order dated 7.8.2012....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e respondent was also paying interest to DHIL in respect of an entirely different contract / transaction from the one in respect whereof DHIL paid interest to the respondent. The AO held that exemption under section 10 (23G) can be allowed only on the net interest received by the respondent. 9. The CIT (A) held that there was no connection between the transaction in respect whereof DHIL paid the respondent interest and the transaction in respect whereof the respondent paid DHIL interest. He further held that there was no provision in section 10(23G) to allow exemption only on the net interest amount arrived at in this manner. He therefore, held that subject to necessary approval from the Central Government, the deduction under section 10(2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... makes no difference. It is not contended that the transactions are colourable or that there is any connection between them. It was not suggested that the transactions were structured to avoid tax. The issue raised in paragraph (i) does not raise a substantial question of law. Re. : Question (j) (j) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in law in allowing the charges incurred by the Assessee Company towards Depository Services and Dematerialisation of share certificates amounting to Rs.3,09,870/- as a business expenditure even though the aforesaid expenses were clearly linked to making of investments and not for business activity of the Assessee Company?" 12. The assessee incurred expenses ....