TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (10) TMI 1594
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....& in law, the Ld. (CIT) has erred in restricting the addition u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D from Rs. 3,89,51,174/- to Rs. 23,79,288/-. 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 91,89,791/- made by A.O. in respect of expenses debited in P&L A/c under the "Employee Stock Option Cost"? 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 11,23,89,000/- made by AO in respect of difference of fair market value and the value adopted by the assessee for relinquishment of right in commercial property? 4. That the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is erroneous and is not tenable on facts and in law....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t during the year under consideration, the assessee earned dividend income of Rs. 4,83,547/- and the decision in Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694, is that by no stretch of imagination can Section 14A or Rule 8D be interpreted so as to mean that the entire tax exempt income was to be disallowed and the window for disallowance was indicated in Section 14A, and was only to the extent of disallowing expenditure "incurred by the assessee in relation to the tax exempt income". He submitted that it is held in this decision that this proportion or portion of the tax exempt income surely cannot swallow the entire amount as has happened in this case. 4. We have gone through the record. By way of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Ld.CIT(A) in continuing the addition but to a limited extent. In our considered opinion, the finding of the Ld.CIT(A) cannot be challenged by the Revenue keeping in view the settled position of law on this aspect and also in view of the fact that the assessee accepted the same without challenging it by way of appeal or cross-objection. We, therefore, upheld the finding of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss this ground of appeal. 5. Now, turning to Ground No.2, the AO made an addition of Rs. 91,89,791/- in respect of ESOP alleging the outgoing expenses are only notional and the expenditure is allowable only when the shares are purchased by the employer. However, in view of the fact that this issue was covered in assessee's own case in respe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....received by the assessee on sale of land and building is less than the value adopted or assessable by any Stamp Valuation Authority, then the value so adopted or assessable by Stamp Valuation Authority shall be deemed to the full value of the consideration received as a result of transfer of capital assets, and on consideration of the record including relinquishment deed, sale deed considered by the DVO for comparison of the value of circle rates, Ld.CIT(A) found the value at which the rights were relinquished is more than the valuation as per the circle rates prescribed by the Stamp Valuation Authority inasmuch as value as per the relinquish mandate deed was Rs. 55,85,15,000/-, the value assessable as per Stamp Valuation Authority was only....