2016 (6) TMI 104

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o 2.1 other grounds are argumentative and supportive to the main Ground No. 2.1 which reads as under:- "2.1. That within the facts and circumstances of the case and law on the point, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in disallowing the expenses of Rs. 2,50,674.00/- u/s 14A with w.r.t Rule 8D of the Income tax Act, 1961 (Act) without appreciating that the Appellant had earned dividend on investment made in 1996 and further dividend income was credited directly to the bank account without any manual intervention and no expenses were incurred by the Appellant to earn such dividend income and that for such reason no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is warranted." 3. We have heard argument of both the sides and carefully perused the material av....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....overted this claim of the assessee by recording his dissatisfaction about the correctness of the suo moto disallowance of the assessee. 4. The Ld. Counsel drawn our attention towards recent judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdiction High Court of Delhi dated 24/9/2015 in case of CIT(A) Vs. I.P Estate Support Services India Pvt. Ltd passed in ITA NO. 283/2014 and submitted that the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court after considering its earlier decision in the case of Maxcopp Investment (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (2012) 347 ITR 272 (Del), categorically held that the Court disapproved of A.O invoking Section 14A Rule 8D (2) of the I.T Rules 1962 without recording his satisfaction and noted that the recording of satisfaction as to why " the voluntary disallowa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Section 14A read with Rule 8D of the I.T Rules 1962. The relevant operative part of this judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court reads as under: 8. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, the Court finds that the AO has indeed proceeded on the erroneous premise that the invocation of Section 14A is automatic and comes into operation as soon as the dividend income is claimed exempt. In Maxopp Investment (P) Ltd. (supra) this Court held: "30. Sub-section (2) of section 14A of the said Act provides the manner in which the Assessing Officer is to determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income. However, if we examine the provision carefully, we wou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....pplies to cases where the assessee asserts that no expenditure had been incurred in relation to exempt income. In both cases, the Assessing Officer, if satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of such expenditure or no expenditure, as the case may be, cannot embark upon a determination of the amount of expenditure in accordance with any prescribed method, as mentioned in sub-section (2) of section 14A of the said Act. It is only if the Assessing Officer is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee, in both cases, that the Assessing Officer gets jurisdiction to determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to such income which does not form part of the total income under the said....