AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (6) TMI 593
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....referred to as "the Act") dated 28/11/2014 relevant to Assessment Year (AY) 2012-13. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 4,45,14,154/- on account of disallowance of provision of bad debt or bad and doubtful debt. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 36,08,45,107/- u/s14A of the Act. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ''Ld.CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the ''Ld.CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored to the above extent. 5. The appellant ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar 2011 -12, on the following ground: "The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance amounting to Rs. 3,89,90,537/- made by AO on account of provision for bad and doubtful debts made by assessee." 2. At the time of hearing before us, learned representatives fairly agree that the grievance raised by the Assessing Officer in the appeal is covered, in favour of the assessee, by a decision of the co-ordinate bench in assessee's own case for assessment year 2006-07 (ITA No. 335/Ahd/2011; order dated 27.10.2016) wherein the co-ordinate bench has observed as follows:- "6, We find that so far deduction of actual bad debts written off, of Rs. 36,11,57,536/-, are concerned, it is not in dispute that amounts have ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....6(1)(vii) of the Act, as bad debts, the learned Tribunal has heavily relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank v. CIT, reported in (2010) 323 ITR 166. We have also considered the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank vs. CIT (supra). The question which is proposed in the present appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Vijaya Bank v. CIT (supra). In the case of Vijaya Bank v. CIT (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed and held that where assessee bank had written off impugned bad debt in its books by way of a debit to profit and loss account, simultaneously reducing corresponding amount from loans and advances....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issue raised by the Revenue is that learned CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition made by the AO for Rs. 36,08,45,107.00 under section 14A of the Act. 8. The assessee in the year under consideration has shown dividend income of Rs. 19,08,444.00 only which was claimed as exempt income under section 10(34) of the Act. The assessee against such exempted income has made the disallowance of Rs. 3,67,12,065.00 only. However, the AO was not satisfied with the disallowance made by the assessee as the same was not as per the provisions of rule 8D of Income Tax Rules. Therefore the AO worked out the disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D for Rs. 39,75,57,172.00 and made the disallowance of the remaining amount for Rs. 36,08,45,107.00( 39,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see has declared dividend income of Rs. 22,697/- which was claimed as exempt from taxes u/s. 10(35) of the Act. The Ld.AO made an analysis of the expenditure required to be disallowed for earning this tax free income. He worked out the disallowance with the help of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. Such disallowance has been worked out at Rs. 8,05,856/-. It is pertinent to observe that the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court on the issue in the case of CIT vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt.Ltd. reported in (2014) 223 Taxman 0130 and Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 378 ITR 033 have concurred with each other that if there is no dividend income or tax free income in a year, then no disallowance U/S.14A can be....