Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
TMI Blog
Home / TMI Blogs / RSS

2012 (10) TMI 890

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t. 3. The brief facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer observed that whether the shares are held as investments or as stock-in-trade or held for strategic purposes is a business decision taken by the assessee. Whatever be such decision, any dividend earned on such shares will be exempt by virtue of section 10. As the dividend income does not form part of the total income under the Act, the provisions of Sec.14A would come into play. Therefore, the Assessing Officer disallowed the interest of Rs. 72,83,21,913/- on the ground of borrowed funds utilized for investment in shares. The same was confirmed in appeal by the DRP. 4. Ld. Authorised Representative of the assessee filed a copy of order of the Tribunal for immediately pre....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t received any dividend income on the shares, which is exempt from tax. We find that the Tribunal while deciding the appeal of assessee for Assessment Year 2006-07 failed to consider the decision of the Delhi Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (supra) where it was held that even in a year where no exempt income was earned or received by the assessee, disallowance u/s. 14A can be made. Respectfully following the decision of the Delhi Special Bench of the Tribunal, we dismiss this ground of appeal of assessee. 7. The ground No.2 of the appeal of assessee relates to Hon'ble DRP erred in holding that the transaction between the assessee and its AE were not at arm's length and in upholding the adjustments of Rs. 4,72....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ear 2006-07 while deciding the same issue, has observed at page-19 at para-11 as under:- "11. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of the TPO clearly shows that the assessee had raised the funds by way of issuance of 0% optional convertible preferential shares. Thus it is noticed that the funds raised by the assessee company for giving the loan to India Telecom Holdings Ltd., Mauritius, which is its Associated Enterprises and which is the subsidiary company, is out of the funds of the assessee company. It is not borrowed funds. The assessee has given the loan to the Associated Enterprises in US dollars. The assessee is also receiving interest from the Associated Enterprises in Indian rupees. Once the transacti....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the figure of Rs. 61,04,722/- as TDS paid for computing the tax payable. The assessee claimed TDS in the return of income at Rs. 7,49,23,898/-. The DRP has observed that in the submissions assessee has not given any basis for TDS claim made by it. In the earlier year also, dispute on TDS has raised and it was found by the DRP that the TDS credit was not given for defective certificates. The issue was restored t the Assessing Officer by the Hon'ble ITAT. In the present year, the assessee's claim was quite bad and unsubstantiated and therefore, the objection was not accepted. However, DRP directed the Assessing Officer to consider the claim as per law with respect to the claim of TDS. 12. Before us, the Ld. Authroised Representative of the....