2013 (4) TMI 380

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt contends that the learned C.I.T. has erred in directing the Assessing Officer to work out the disallowance u/s 14A in terms of the decision of the Bombay High Court in the case of GODREJ & BOYCE MFG CO. LTD instead of directing the AO to delete the same in the light of the representation made by the Appellant. iii) Learned C.I.T. has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs.76,85,323 u/s 40(a)(ia) of the I.T. Act rejecting the contention of the Appellant that the provisions of the said section were not applicable to the amounts in question. Without prejudice to the above, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the learned C.I.T erred in holding that even otherwise the said expenditure was not allowable as a bu....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..../s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D in terms of the decision dt. 20-10-2008 of the ITAT Special Bench, Mumbai in the case Daga Capital Management Pvt. Ltd. Assessee preferred an appeal before the FAA. Following the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay HC the case Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co.Ltd., he directed the AO to work out the disallowance. 3.1. Before us, AR requested that AO may be directed to consider the bank charges(Rs.1.83 Crores), investments in shares of overseas subsidiary (Rs. 225 lakhs out of Rs. 675.02 lacs) and investment made in Kotak FMP Series 23 while calculating the disallowance. DR relied upon the order of the FAA. 3.2. As the submissions made by the AR are found to be reasonable, AO is directed to calculate disallowance u/s. 14A as dire....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....zed during the year, that the expenditure remained unascertainable and accordingly, in terms of mercantile system of accounting and Accounting Standards, it could not be claimed or allowed. He further held that quantification of the expenses had been made without processing and receipt of the relevant documentation and raising of bills, that the Appellant had not explained how the estimate made could be held as scientific and accurate based on historical analysis, that provisions made by the Appellant did not lead to the conclusion that the same were ascertained. He found the disallowance 'justified' and confirmed the same. 4.1. Before us AR submitted that no disallowance could be made u/s. 40(a)(ia)of the Act in respect of year end acco....