TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 1459
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....1), Mumbai for the A.Y. 2006-07 vide order dated 31-12-2008 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter 'the Act'). 2. The first common issue in both the cross appeals is as regards to the order of CIT(A) setting aside the order of AO directing him to work out total expenditure i.e. direct or indirect both in relation to exempt income and make disallowance in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs. DCIT (2010) 328 ITR 81 (Bom). The Revenue has filed this appeal against the finding of CIT(A) that Rule 8D is applicable only for and from AY 2008-09 and not for the relevant assessment year 2006-07. Assessee is in appeal against the order of CIT(A) in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aring funds in the shares and mutual funds from where it has earned tax free exempt income and also other arguments which is not been considered by CIT(A). Even otherwise, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that this issue stands now covered by the Tribunal's decision for AY 2005-06 in ITA in ITA No. 3603 and 3789/Mum/2009 for AY 2005-06 order dated 28-02-2017, wherein Tribunal has restored the matter back to the file of the AO by relying the earlier years ITAT order in assessee's own case by observing Para 7 and 8 as under: - "7. We have considered the submissions of the parties and perused the material available on record. As could be seen, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) while deciding the issue of disallowance under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e with the law prevalent for the year under consideration, after affording the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard and to file details/submissions required in this regard. We hold and direct accordingly. Consequently, grounds I and II of the assessee‟s appeal are treated as allowed for statistical purposes." 8. Respectfully following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench cited supra, we restore the issue back to the Assessing Officer for deciding afresh keeping in view the directions of the Tribunal after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Grounds no.(i) and (ii) are allowed for statistical purposes." 5. On query from the Bench the learned Sr. DR fairly conceded the position and state....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lier assessment years, the first appellate authority had given a categorical finding that the loans and advances given to the subsidiaries were for commercial expediency. However, in the impugned assessment year, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that the assessee has failed to establish the commercial expediency in advancing interest free funds to the subsidiary. Though, assessee had submitted before the learned Commissioner (Appeals) that the advances were made out of common pool having borrowed funds and self-generated funds, however, the learned Commissioner (Appeals) has observed that in the absence of any verification that the advances to the subsidiary companies was only out of self-generated income, assessee's claim ca....