TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2015 (3) TMI 139
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....filed its return of income for A.Y. 09-10 on 30.09.09 declaring total income of RS. 7,62,35,480/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter the assessment was framed 143(3) vide order dated 26.12.2011 and the total income was determined at Rs. 8,93,62,750/-. Aggrieved by the order of A.O Assessee carried the matter before Ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 10.10.2012 granted partial relief to the Assessee. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), Revenue is now in appeal before us and has raised following effective grounds:- 1. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance made of Rs. 1,03,21,009/- on account of bad debts without appreciating the fact that the bad debt claimed by the assessee pertain....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e matter before ld. CIT(A). Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by holding as under:- 3.3 I have considered the facts of the case. The AO has disallowed an amount of Rs. 1,03,21,009/- as bad debts as AO has observed that if there is any bad debt of the joint venture KECL Jv Ellora on account of short recovery from the principal MSRDC, the same is to be written off in the account books of the said joint venture only and its partners have nothing to do with the said bad debt as far as taxability of their own income is concerned. The appellant has submitted that the Assessing Officer completely overlooked the fact that the assessee company is a sub-contractor and the invoices which are raised in the name of KECL J.V. Ellora, who in turn, raises....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f Rs. 1 ,03,21,009/- as bad debt and it cannot be disallowed on the basis that the contract is between KECL J.V. Ellora and MSRDC, overlooking the fact that the assessee company is a sub-contractor who raises its own invoices for the work done and gets paid for the same. The appellant has demonstrated the treatment of the entries as is being maintained regularly in the books of accounts. In view of the above discussion and in view of the latest Supreme Court decision in case of T.R.F. Limited vs. CIT reported in 323 ITR 397, the claim of the appellant of the bad debts is allowable. The AO is directed to delete the addition of Rs. 1,03,21,009/-. 5. Aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A) Revenue is now in appeal before us. Before us, ld. D.R....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rate accounts of interest bearing and non interest bearing funds utilized for investment. He was of the view that the funds once put in business gets intermingled and is not possible to keep the funds segregated and thus in the absence of any specific details of source of investment in shares, he was of the view that it could be inferred that Assessee has invested interest bearing funds in making investment in shares. He therefore the worked out the disallowance u/s. 14A and disallowed Rs. 22,32,577/-. Aggrieved by the order of A.O Assessee carried the matter before CIT(A) CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the Assessee granted partial relief to the Assessee by following the decision in Assessee own case for A.Y. 08-09 by holding a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....er concern, as has been demonstrated herein above. The Assessing Officer is not in a position to dislodge this submission of the assessee nor is he in a position to state that what is claimed by the assessee is not correct having regard to the account of the assessee. After going through the facts and the case laws cited by the appellant, it is seen that AO has never pointed out as to how the Appellant has made the investments from the borrowed funds which is required as per the section 14A of the IT Act1961. On the contrary the appellant has demonstrated before the AO regarding the flow of funds invested with the sister concern. In the earlier year the C.I.T.(Appeals) had decided the issue of spare funds being available with the assessee, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... He further submitted that since Assessee was having sufficient interest free funds which were far in excess of the investment and therefore relying on the decision in the case of Reliance Utilities reported in 313 ITR 340 (Bom.) submitted that no disallowance on account of interest be made. He thus supported the order of ld. CIT(A). 9. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. Before us, ld. A.R has placed Balance sheet and the issue in the present ground is disallowance u/s. 14A. On its perusal, it is seen that the Assessee was having shareholders funds comprising of Capital, reserves and surplus which were far in excess of the investment. In the case of Reliance Utilities 313 ITR 340 (Bom) (supra) the Ho....