TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (3) TMI 1840
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e order dated 30.06.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)"] relevant to the assessment year 2012-13. 3. The assessee has raised the following grounds: - "1. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of income Tax (Appeal) - 2 (hereinafter referred to as "the Ld. CIT(A)") erred in not deleting the disallowance of Rs. 2,34,17,801 made as expenses incurred towards earning exempt income u/s 14A r.w.r 8D and remitting the matter back to the AO to re-compute the disallowance, without appreciating the fact that no expenditure was actually incurred by the appellant for earning such income. 2. That on the facts and in the c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd raised the addition in view of the provisions u/s 8D(iii) in sum of Rs. 2,34,17,801/-. Accordingly, the income of the assessee was assessed in sum of Rs. 345,88,57,040/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) who confirmed the addition, therefore, the assessee has filed the present appeal before us. ISSUE Nos. 1 to 2:- 5. Under these issues the assessee has challenged the confirmation of the addition in sum of Rs. 2,34,17,801/- raised u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D(iii) of the Act. At the very outset, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has argued that the issue has been restored before the AO in earlier A.Ys.2010-11 & 2011-12 by the Hon'ble ITAT in the assessee's own case in ITA. Nos. 3057 & 3058/M/2017, there....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce under Rule 8D. Reliance was placed on the decision of Tribunal in Reliance Capital Asset Management Ltd. vs. DCIT (ITA No. 4459/Mum/2012) on identical sets of facts held that Rule 8D(iii) should not be applied as investments made by the assessee is mainly in schemes of Reliance Mutual Fund and group concern which does not requires incurrence of any major expenditure as these investment are driven by the central business policy and strategy. 5. Further reliance was placed on the following decisions of Mumbai Bench of ITAT:- Garware Wall Ropes Limited vs. Addl. CIT (I.T.A.No.4957/Mum/2012) . - JM financial Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT (I.T.A. No.4521/Mum/2012). - Interglobe Enterprises Ltd. vs. DCIT (I.T.A. No.158....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....these investments are taxable, the question of applying disallowance under section 14A does not arise. The Assessing Officer should examine all these aspects and decide the issue in accordance with law after providing adequate opportunity to the Assessee." 6. Since the matter of controversy has already restored before the AO, therefore, in the said circumstances by following the order of coordinate bench, we set aside the finding of the CIT(A) on these issues and restored the issue before the AO to decide the matter of controversy afresh on similar lines. Needless to say that an opportunity of being heard is required to be given to the assessee in accordance with law. Accordingly, these issues are hereby decided in favour of the assessee....