TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (5) TMI 1092
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the assessee are as under: "1. The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 6, Chennai dated 25.10.2018 in I.T.A.No.112/CIT(A)-6/2015-16 for the above mentioned Assessment Year is contrary to law, facts, and in the circumstances of the case. 2. The CIT (Appeals) erred in confirming partly the disallowance of notional expenses for earning tax free income/for maintaining tax free portfolio within the scope of section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 without assigning proper reasons and justification. 3. The CIT (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the provisions of section 14A of the Act had no application and ought to have appreciated that in the absence of requisite satisfaction on th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... expenses as prior period expenses based on the accounting entry for sustaining the disallowance of such expenses in the computation of taxable total income was wrong, erroneous, unjustified, incorrect and not sustainable in law. 15. The CIT(Appeals) went wrong in recording the findings in paras 10.3.13 & 10.3.14 of the impugned order without assigning proper reasons and justification. 16. The CIT(Appeals) erred in sustaining the disallowance of the amount (Rs.3,08,81,612/-) considered for reversal of notional income offered for taxation in the preceding assessment year pertaining to the carbon credit in the computation of taxable total income without assigning proper reasons and justification. 17. The CIT(Appeals) went wrong in re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the ld. CIT(A).The ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 25-10-2018 partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 4. Being aggrieved, the assessee filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. Heard the representatives of both the parties and perused the materials on record. We adjudicate the appeals of the assessee as under: 5. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D- Rs. 7,46,393/-: The ld. AO during the assessment proceedings noticed that the assessee had shown of Rs. 4,45,95,891/- which are exempt income yielding investments of the assessee. As per section 14A of the Act no expenditure incurred for the purpose of earning an exempt income shall be allowed against the taxable profits. The ld. AO believed that the assessee incurred some expenditure towards m....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ingly, we decide the issue of disallowance of Rs. 7,46,393/- made u/s 14A r.w.r 8D in favour of the assessee fully and set aside the order of the ld. CIT(A) dated 25.10.2018 as well as the order of the ld. AO dated 31-03-2015 to that extent as related to disallowance of Rs. 7,46,393/- and direct the ld. AO to delete the addition of Rs. 7,46,393/- from the total income of the assessee. 7. Listing charges paid to Bank of New York - Rs. 4,87,247/-: The facts of the case on this issue was that the assessee paid Rs. 4,87,247/- to the Bank of New York as shares listing charges in Luxembourg Exchange. No TDS was deducted by the assessee while paying of this sum to the Bank of New York. The ld. CIT(A) vide para No. 8.3.5 and para no. 8.3.7 of his....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons of DTAA after giving a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, we allow this ground of the assessee and set-aside the addition till the re-examination of the issue by the ld. AO. The ld. AO shall pass an appropriate order after re-consideration of the issue. Accordingly, appeal of the assessee on this issue is allowed for statistical purposes only. 10. Disallowance of Rs. 33,74,251/-: The claim of Rs. 33,74,251/- by the assessee is related to the prior period expenditure. The assessee, however, paid the amount during the previous year. The claim of the assessee is that due to dispute on the bill amount, the same could not be paid during the relevant period. The ld. CIT(A) observed that the assessee did not make an....