TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (3) TMI 157
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ce of Rs. 26,70,000/- made by the Assessing Officer towards administrative expenses under clause (iii) of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules without appreciating that making a disallowance as per Rule 8D results in arbitrary, unreasonable and unjustified disallowance. 2. That the CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the Appellant had added an amount of Rs. 100,000/- in the return of income on account of disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act for administrative expenses which ought to have been accepted by the Assessing Officer, being reasonable and justified considering fact on the case. 3. That the CIT(A) erred in not appreciating the fact that the Assessing Officer has not discussed and recorded satisfaction to the effe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arifying the exclusion of income derived from strategic investments for the purpose of computation of disallowance. The order of the Hon'ble High Court is as under: IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI ITA 281/2019 & CM APPL. 14304/2019 THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 4 ...... Appellant Through : Mr. Ruchir Bhatia, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus H.T. MEDIA LTD. Respondent Through : Mr. V.P. Gupta and Mr. Arunav Kumar, Advs. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE PRATEEK JALAN ORDER 29.03.2019 "The question urged by the Revenue in its appeal is with respect to the correctness of the remand mad....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 31.03.2012 (crores) Average Investment (crores) Investments on which dividend income was received during the year. 117.75 102.75 110.250020 Less: Investment in subsidiary company. 56.85 56.85 56.85 Remaining investment 60.90 45.90 53.40 Disallowance at 0.5% Rs. 26,70,000 In view of judgment of Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC), investment in subsidiary company is also to be considered for the purpose of disallowance. Accordingly, the order of CIT(A) is to be reversed to the extent he had excluded average investment of Rs. 56.85 crores in the subsidiary company. Accordingly, disallowance following the judgment of H....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sed in principle by the ld. DR. The relevant portion of the said judgment is as under: "5. Under Section 254 of the Income-tax Act, the Appellate Tribunal may, after giving both the parties to the appeal an opportunity of being heard, pass such orders thereon as it thinks fit. The power of the Tribunal in dealing with appeals is thus expressed in the widest possible terms. The purpose of the assessment proceedings before the taxing authorities is to assess correctly the tax liability of an assessee in accordance with law. If, for example, as a result of a judicial decision given while the appeal is pending before the Tribunal, it is found that a non-taxable item is taxed or a permissible deduction is denied, we do not see any reaso....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal and each case has to be considered on its own facts. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner must be satisfied that the ground raised was bona fide and that the same could not have been raised earlier for good reasons. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner should exercise his discretion in permitting or not permitting the assessee to raise an additional ground in accordance with law and reason. The same observations would apply to appeals before the Tribunal also. 7. The view that the Tribunal is confined only to issues arising out of the appeal before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) takes too narrow a view of the powers of the Appellate Tribunal [vide, e.g., C.I.T. v. Anand Prasad (Delhi), C.I.T. v. Karamchand Premchand....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....vt. Ltd. ITA Nos. 801 to 803/Indore/2018. * Atlas Copco India Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No. 736/Pune/2011 * Tata Autocomp Hendrickson vs. DCIT in ITA No. 2486/Pune/2017 * Symantec Software India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in ITA No. 1824/Pune/2018 * Sicpa India Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No. 704/Kol/2015 * Philips India Ltd. vs. ACIT in ITA No. 2612/Kol/2019 * DCIT vs. The Peerless General Finance & Investment & Co. Ltd. in ITA No. 1469/Kol/2019. * ACIT vs. ITC Infotech in ITA No. 220/Kol/2017 * Reckitt Benckiser India Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT (2020) 117 taxmann.com 519 (Kol.) * Crystal Crop. Protection Pvt. Ltd. vs. JCIT in ITA No. 1539/Del/2016 * Midland Credit Manageme....