TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (8) TMI 59
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... (a) Learned CIT (A) erred in law in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer amounting to Rs. 35,67,544/- with the aid of Section 14 of I.T. Act, 1961, r.w.Rule 8D of IT Rules, 1962. (b) Learned CIT (A) erred in confirming inclusion of this amount in the adjusted book profit computed for the purpose of section 115JB. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee company has filed its return of income on 28.09.2009 declaring nil income and book profit u/s 115JB of the I.T. Act has been shown at Rs. 17,66,70,618/-. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment and notice u/s 143(2) was issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee company is engaged in the business of printing activities. W....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....carefully. The learned Counsel for the assessee pointed out that in the subsequent year i.e. assessment year 2010-11, similar disallowance was made in the case of the assessee. ITAT has set aside the orders of the Revenue authorities and remitted back the issue to the Assessing Officer for re-adjudication. She emphasised that both the issues are covered in favour of the assessee by this order. The learned DR on the other hand pointed that in this year, the Assessing Officer has considered the details of interest expenses. He recorded a finding that the claim of the assessee for disallowance of Rs. 1,28,507/- is being not substantiated with material. Thus the Assessing Officer was not satisfied with the correctness of the account maintained ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the assessee as on 31-3-2010 that the assessee has invested in shares/mutual funds at Rs. 19,35,58,090/- on which dividend income of Rs. 18,30,232/- is claimed as exempt u/s 10(34) of the Act. The AO observed that the assessee has not made any disallowance u/s 14A as expenses incurred on earning of the exempt income. Therefore, show cause notice was issued to the assessee. The assessee filed its reply stating that the investment in shares of Indian companies and the mutual funds till 31-3-2010 is less than 15% of the net owned funds and the borrowed funds had not been utilized for making these investments. The assessee claimed that no expenses had been incurred by the assessee to earn income of Rs. 18,30,232/- and therefore no disallowanc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....precedent in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT(supra) and the provisions of rule 8D, has remanded the issue to the file of the AO for re-examination. The relevant portion of the order at para.5.3.5 at page 7 is reproduced hereunder: "5.3.5 In this appeal, the dispute in respect of the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D is with regard to expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(ii) i.e. expenditure which is not directly attributable to any particular income or receipt and Rule 8D(2)(iii) i.e. other indirect expenditure than that referred to in Rule 8D(2)(i) and 8D(2)(ii). It is seen from the facts on record that the assessee has not deducted any expenses direct or indirect, while computing its income from dividend income whic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the learned counsel for the assessee has placed reliance upon the decision of the 'D' Bench of the Tribunal at Mumbai in the case of Reliance Industrial Infrastructure Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT in ITA Nos.69 & 70/Mum/2009 dated 5-4-2013 wherein, by following the decision of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd,. it was held that while computation of adjusted book profits, the provisions of sec.14A cannot be imported into clause (f) of the Explanation to sec.115JB of the Act. Copy of the said order is produced before us. Learned Departmental Representative, Shri Balakrishnan, on the other hand, supported the orders of the authorities below. 5. Having heard both the parties and having considered the material on rec....