AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2018 (12) TMI 1725
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n holding that the internal TNMM adopted by te assessee as the most appropriate method without examining the comparable adopted by the assessee are proper or not." iv) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to exclude the strategic investment made by the assessee to the tune of Rs. 38,10,02,000/- as on 31.03.2010 and Rs. 5,12,86,000/- as on 31,03.2011 while computing the disallowance of under section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rule, 1962." v) "Whether on the facts, and the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of interest expenses of Rs. 42,87,ooo/- under section 14A without appreciating the sub-rule 80(3) starts with heading "Formula for determination of expenditure" and the three steps prescribed under this sub-rule to compute the expenditure in relation to exempt income and shall be applied collectively. Therefore, the total disallowance under section 14A has to be the aggregate of the amounts determined so by applying three steps together and not in isolation as done by the Ld. CIT(A)." vi) "Whether on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... sub-rule to compute the expenditure in relation to exempt income and shall be applied collectively. Therefore, the total disallowance u/s 14A has to be the aggregate of the amounts determined so by applying three steps together and not in isolation as done by the Ld. CIT(A). (vi) "Whether on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) erred in ignoring the CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014 wherein it has been clarified that the term "includibte" in the Heading section 14A of the Act and the Heading to Rule 8D of I.T. Rules, 1962 indicates that for invoking disallowance u/s 14A, it is not material that the assessee should have earned such exempt income during the financial year under consideration". (vii) "Whether on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) erred in holding that provisions of Sec 14A cannot be imported while computing book profit u/s 115JB". (viii) "Whether on the facts, and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT-(A) pertaining to A.Ys. 1999-2000 and 2000-01 against business income of current year." The appellant prays that the order of the CIT(A) on the above ground be set aside and that of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Income Tax Act while computing the book profit u/s 115JB of the Income Tax Act. The appellant prays that the same may kindly be deleted. Ground Wo, 5: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in failing to grant a deduction of Rs. 21.82 lakhs, on account of depreciation on revalued assets, while calculating the book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. The appellant prays that the said action of the Hon'ble CIT (A) be deleted. Ground No. 6: On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the Ld. AO in failing to grant a deduction of Rs. 1,58,60,913 instead of Rs. 61,43,854, being deduction relating gain on foreign exchange fluctuations on capital assets. The appellant prays that the said action of the Hon'ble CIT (A) may kindly be deleted. The appellant craves to add, alter, amend or delete all or any of the grounds of appeal before or during the course of hearing. 2009-10 Ground No. 1: In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ('CIT(A)' ) gross....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,000 u/s 14A while computing book profits under MAT provisions. The appellant prays that the same may kindly be deleted. A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that the assessee is engaged in the manufacture of Polyester films. During the course of scrutiny assessment for the A.Ys 2010-11 & 2011-12 the A.O made addition on account of transfer pricing adjustment u/s 92C of the Act, disallowance u/s 14A while computing normal income as well as income u/s 115JB of the Act. The A.O also declined set off of unabsorbed depreciation pertains to the A.Ys 1999-2000 and 2000-01. 4. By the impugned order the Ld. CIT(A) deleted the above addition in both the years against which Revenue is in further appeal before us. 5. We have considered rival contentions and carefully gone through the orders of the authorities below. From the record we found that Ground of appeal No. 1 to 3 taken by the Revenue is with regard to deletion of transfer pricing adjustment made u/s 92C of the Act we found that addition was deleted by CIT(A) after following the order of the Tribunal in assessee‟s own case for the A.Ys 2006-07 and 2007-08. The....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....:- "In view of the above discussion as well as decision of Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Biocon Ltd., (supra), we are of the view that the interest expenditure which is otherwise allowable deduction u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act but differed as per the provisions of Sec. 43B cannot be disallowed because of the reason that the payment is not in cash but by issuance of share capital. Accordingly, we concur with the view of the Tribunal in the case of Suryalakshmi Cotton Mills Ltd., JSW Steel Ltd and Cable Corporation of India Ltd and by following the decision of Special Bench in the case of Biocon Ltd., in our view, the Explanation3C cannot be applied in the case of interest payable, converted into share capital as the interest liability stand ceased to exist and not deferred as in case of conversion of interest loan or borrowing. The RBI master Circular would not help the case of revenue as it was a guideline for the banks ought to give the accounting treatment of restructured loan and interest" 10. The decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Rathi Graphics Technologies Ltd., [2015] 378 ITR 107 (Delhi) in ITA No. 780 and 785 of 2014 also....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the CIT(A) has deleted the same. 16. Rival contentions have been heard and perused in the A.Y 2009-10 From the record, we find that during the course of assessment the assessee has argued for exclusion the investments made in the group concerns while computing the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act and relied on the decision of the Tribunal in earlier years. We do not find any merit in this contention of the Ld. AR in so far as Hon‟ble Supreme Court recent decision in the case of Maxoup Investment dated 12.02.2018 have held that even investments made in group concern as strategical investment is also liable for disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 16. In view of the above we confirmed the action of the A.O with regard to inclusion of strategical investment / investment made in group concerns while working out average investment on which disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D of the IT Rules is warranted. 17. However, as per our considered view no disallowance is to made if there is no dividend income during the year, in this regard Hon‟ble ITAT, Mumbai in the case of Slyvex cable Co. Pvt. Ltad Vs. DCIT in ITA No. 8581/Mum/2011 dated 24.02.2016, held as under: "6. We find force ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Mum/2012 dated 21.06.2018. 21. In the A.Y 2009-10, we find that assessee was having own funds of Rs. 23,758.60 lakhs against which investment was only to the tune of Rs. 3,810.02 lakhs. Accordingly no disallowance of interest is warranted in terms of judicial pronouncements referred above. 22. Facts and circumstances in the A.Y 2010-11 and 2011-12, wherein the Revenue is aggrieved for deleting the disallowance of interest so made by the A.O u/s 14A of the Act. Respectfully following the reasoning given in the A.Y 2009-10 herein above we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) for the A.Y 2010-11 and 2011-12 with regard to deleting disallowance of interest so made u/s 14A of the Act. 23. For the A.Y 2008-09 assessee is aggrieved for disallowance of depreciation on revalued assets in computing the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. 24. We have considered the rival contentions and found that the assessee has made fresh claim before the A.O during the assessment proceedings which was declined by the A.O on the plea that the assessee has not filed revised return of income. Keeping in view of the decision of the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case....