AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (6) TMI 169
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Act by the Assessing Officer ignoring the fact that the assessee has not claimed any exempted income during the year under consideration. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the record of the case. The Assessing Officer noticed that the assessee has earned dividend income and calculated the same as per sub-rule (2) of Rule 8D of the I.T.Rules and made disallowance of Rs. 10,81,553/-. On appeal, the CIT (Appeals) has confirmed the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. 4. Before us, the learned Authorised Representative of the assessee has submitted that the assessee has not incurred any expenditure for earning the dividend income and, accordingly, has not claimed any exempt income. He has further submitte....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed the orders of the lower authorities. 7. On careful consideration of the rival submissions, we find that the Assessing Officer has made a disallowance by noting the fact that the assessee has made average investment as on 31.3.2009 at Rs. 26,00,000/- and as on 31.3.2010 at Rs. 4,50,60,000/- and calculated as per formula under sub-rule (2) of Rule 8D at Rs. 10,81,553/- considering the interest expenses. Thus, it is clear from the assessment order that the Assessing Officer has not expressed any satisfaction that the assessee has incurred certain expenditure for earning the dividend income in question. There is no quarrel that section 14A postulates the disallowance of expenditure incurred for earning the exempt income which is not formi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....conclusion of the hearing, the Bench shall give a date of pronouncement. In a case where no date of pronouncement is given by the Bench, every endeavour shall be made by the Bench to pronounce the order within 60 days from the date on which the hearing of the case was concluded but, where it is not practicable so to do on the ground of exceptional and extraordinary circumstances of the case, the Bench shall fix a future day for pronouncement of the order, and such date shall not ordinarily be a day beyond a further period of 30 days and due notice of the day so fixed shall be given on the notice board. As such, "ordinarily", the order on an appeal should be pronounced by the Bench within no more than 90 days from the date of concluding the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....al viz; ITAT, Mumbai 'F' Bench in DCIT, Central Circle-3(2), Mumbai vs JSW Limited & ors (ITA No.6264/Mum/18 dated 14.5.2020, wherein, it was observed as under: " 9. Let us in this light revert to the prevailing situation in the country. On 24th March, 2020, Hon'ble Prime Minister of India took the bold step of imposing a nationwide lockdown, for 21 days, to prevent the spread of Covid 19 epidemic, and this lockdown was extended from time to time. As a matter of fact, even before this formal nationwide lockdown, the functioning of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai was severely restricted on account of lockdown by the Maharashtra Government, and on account of strict enforcement of health advisories with a view of checking ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nly in India but all over the world. Government of India has, vide notification dated 19th February 2020, taken the stand that, the coronavirus "should be considered a case of natural calamity and FMC (i.e. force majeure clause) maybe invoked, wherever considered appropriate, following the due procedure...". The term 'force majeure' has been defined in Black's Law Dictionary, as 'an event or effect that can be neither anticipated nor controlled' When such is the position, and it is officially so notified by the Government of India and the Covid-19 epidemic has been notified as a disaster under the National Disaster Management Act, 2005, and also in the light of the discussions above, the period during which lockdown was in force ca....