TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (5) TMI 233
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he assessee read as under: 1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in sustaining the addition u/s 14A, in spite of the fact, that, the Appellant has given evidence to substantiate the fact that investment which were made in shares were from interest free funds ¬ interest bearing funds. In light of the above said facts, the addition which is made by the Assessing Officer ought to be deleted. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has also erred in sustaining the ad-hoc addition of Rs. 3,00,000/- made by the Assessing Officer under the pretext cash expenses have been incurred which is supported by self-made office vouchers & are not fully verifiable, in spite of the fact that these expenses ar....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... AO to verify the calculation as per Rule 8D and workout the correct disallowance. 5. Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee submits that the investments have been made from own funds and not borrowed funds and therefore, the disallowance of Rs. 28,38,430/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) is not called for. Also it is stated that the assessee has not incurred any expenditure on the dividend received during the year. Therefore, it is submitted that no addition on this account it liable to be made u/s 14A. 6. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relies on the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). 7. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the relevant materials on record. The reasons for our decisions are given below. 7.1 Regarding the disallowance o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....supra) while considering Section 36(1)(iii) of the Act would apply while considering the application of Section 14A of the Act. The aforesaid decision of this Court in HDFC Bank Ltd. (supra) on the above issue has also been accepted by the Revenue in as much as even though they have filed an appeal to the Supreme Court against that order on the other issue therein viz. broken period interest, no appeal has been preferred by the Revenue on the issue of invoking the principles laid down in Reliance Utilities & Power Ltd. (supra) in its application to Section 14A of the Act." As the own fund in the instant case is more than the investments, respectfully following the above decision, we delete the disallowance of Rs. 28,38,430/- made by the A....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....enses totaling to Rs. 29,87,004/-. He asked the assessee to produce the necessary details/documents, bills, vouchers to substantiate the claim. He verified the same on test check basis and observed that some of these expenses were incurred in cash and were supported by self-made vouchers and not fully verifiable. Accordingly, he disallowed a sum of Rs. 3,00,000/- on ad-hoc basis to cover the personal element involved. 9.1 In appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) followed the order of her predecessor for the AY 2007-08 and confirmed the addition of Rs. 3,00,000/- made by the AO. 9.2 Before us, the Ld. counsel of the assessee submits that all these expenditures were incurred for the purpose of business and therefore, no disallowance is called for. In this....