TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (8) TMI 666
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2012-13. 2.The appeal was admitted on 07.04.2017 on the following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether on facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the claim of expenditure by the appellant is subject to disallowance under the provisions of Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962? (ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that even if there is any income out of investments in shares, the same would be exempt under Section 10(33) of the Act and cannot be computed under the head "income from other sources? (iii) Whether the provision....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the revenue could not controvert the findings rendered by the High Court of Delhi in the case of Joint Investments Private Limited Vs. CIT, reported in (2015) 372 ITR 0694 (Del). 5. It is relevant to point out that in the said decision the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court referred the decision in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax VI Vs. Taikisha Engineering India Limited [ITA No.115/2014 decided on 25.11.2014. 6. Further, the Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited, Mumbai Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, reported in (2010) 328 ITR 0081, has elaborated the procedure to be followed by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A in the following terms. "The following principles would e....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Act. What merits emphasis is that the jurisdiction of the AO to determine the expenditure incurred in relation to such income which does not form part of the total income, in accordance with the prescribed method, arises if the AO is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of the expenditure which the assessee claims to have incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income. Moreover, the satisfaction of the AO has to be arrived at, having regard to the accounts of the assessee. Hence, sub-s. (2) does not ipso facto enable the AO to apply the method prescribed by the rules straightaway without considering whether the claim made by the assessee in respect of the expenditure ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....17. The CBDT after taking note of the two decisions of the Karnataka High Court held that it is now a settled position that in the case of an undertaking which develops, develops and operates or maintains and operates an industrial park/SEZ notified in accordance with the scheme framed and notified by the Government, the income from letting out the premises / developed space along with other facilities in an industrial park/SEZ is to be charged to tax under the head 'Profits and Gains of Business'. 10. As rightly pointed out by Mr.R.Vijaya Raghavan, the emphasis is on not only letting out of the premises / developed space but along with other facilities in an industrial park/SEZ. The tribunal in this regard followed a decision o....