TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (1) TMI 298
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rder dated 30.11.2010. 2. The appeal raises three issues per its three grounds, which we shall take up in seriatim. The first issue is in relation to the disallowance u/s.14A. The Assessing Officer (A.O.) during the course of assessment proceedings observed the assessee to have earned dividend income and long term capital gains (LTCG) at Rs. 68.31 lacs and Rs. 20.87 lacs respectively for the current year, claiming the same as tax exempt. The assessee had, per its computation of income, disallowed a sum of Rs. 1,51,974/- u/s.14A. The assessee's accounts did not reveal any correspondence between the expenses and the exempt income so as to determine that incurred in relation to such income. Accordingly, he proceeded to apply the method ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 81 (Bom) and CIT vs. Maganlal Chhaganlal (P.) Ltd. [1999] 236 ITR 456 (Bom), as well as that by the Tribunal, including by its Special Bench in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 121 ITD 318 (Del-SB), he was of the view that an estimation of the administrative expenses incurred by the assessee toward its investments in equity shares and mutual funds, yielding tax exempt income, would be required to be made. The assessee's accounts, being composite accounts for both the sets of income, i.e., income/s forming part of, and not so, the total income under the Act, not disclosing the said expenditure, the prescription of rule 8D shall apply. The disallowance as made was accordingly confirmed. Aggrie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... Dy. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 81 (Bom). That a good part of the investment, which is liable to yield income which is tax exempt, is in group companies, is in our view of little moment. This is for the simple reason that the estimation mandated by law does not provide any exception in the matter, i.e., in estimating the expenditure, which is essentially a matter of fact, so that it would in fact vary with each fact situation and, perhaps, from year to year even from the same assessee. So, however, we, if only to provide an opportunity to the assessee to present its case, factually and/or legally, restore the matter back to the file of the ld. CIT(A), who shall decide the same in accordance with the law, disposing of each of the assessee's obj....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e's plea of being in appeal for A.Y. 2005-06 is though not without merit. But that by itself would not give rise for a claim for the current year inas-much as the relevant order is only that for A.Y. 2005-06, i.e., as modified by the appellate order (by the first appellate authority) for that year, which continues to be the operative order/s. If, when and to the extent the same is reversed or modified, the assessee would be entitled to all the consequential benefits, including the set off against the income for the subsequent years in terms of the relevant provisions of law. We decide accordingly. 6. The third and the final issue arising is in respect of the disallowance of the assessee's claim for deprecation on a 'leased pr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the parties, and perused the material on record. In our view, the decision by the tribunal in the case of Rishiroop Polymers (P.) Ltd. (supra), rendered following the decision by the hon'ble jurisdictional high court in the case of Dineshkumar Gulabchand Agrawal vs. CIT [2004] 267 ITR 768 (Bom), would apply in the facts and circumstances of the case. The said decisions, in ratio, which alone has precedence value, and in the instant case being by the hon'ble jurisdictional high court is judicially binding, is that the user, along with the ownership of a capital asset, represents a primary condition for the claim of depreciation allowance u/s.32. As such non-satisfaction of this essential condition would disqualify a claim for dep....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sold, discarded, demolished or destroyed in the previous year (other than the previous year in which it is first brought into use), the amount by which the moneys payable in respect of such building, machinery, plant or furniture, together with the amount of scrap value, if any, fall short of the written down value thereof: Provided that such deficiency is actually written off in the books of the assessee. Explanation.-For the purposes of this clause,- (1) "moneys payable" in respect of any building, machinery, plant or furniture includes- (a) any insurance, salvage or compensation moneys payable in respect thereof; (b) where the building, machinery, plant or furniture is sold, the price for which it is sold, so, however, ......