BENNETT COLEMAN & CO LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

On facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Ld CIT(A) erred in upholding disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962. 2.2 Ld CIT(A) failed to appreciate that Rule 8D cannot be invoked without recording objective satisfaction qua Appellant's claim that no expense is relatable to earning exempt income except suo-moto disallowance of 14A offered by Appellant having regard to its books of account. 2.3 Without prejudice to above, Ld CIT(A) erred in rejecting suo-moto disallowance offered by Appellant since such disallowance cannot exceed actual expenses debited to Profit and Loss A/c and claimed in computation of income(COI). 2.4 Without prejudice to above, disallowance be restricted in the manner determined by CIT(A) for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 and upheld by Hon Tribunal for said years.2.5 The Appellant prays that disallowance of Rs.6,26,01,721/ u/s 14A r.w.r 8D be deleted and for appropriately reduced.

On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law without prejudice to above, Ld. AO failed to reduce Securities Transaction Tax expenses of Rs.13,01,397 while computing disallowance u/s 14A rwr 8D which has been added back suo-moto by Appellant in COI.

On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law and without prejudice to above, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the insertion of Explanation to first proviso of S. 14A of the Act vide Finance Act 2022, is prospective in nature and therefore ought to have directed the ld. AO to consider only those investments which have actually yielded tax free income during the year.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in upholding addition of Rs.15,18,85,891/- being the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D, while computing, the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. 5.2 The Appellant prays that the addition made in book profit u/s 115JB of the Act be deleted.

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the ld. AO in not allowing the deduction of Rs. 20,02,35,339/- being difference between book profits and capital gains with indexation benefit arising on transfer of STT paid securities while computing the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. 6.2 The Appellant prays that the deduction of Rs.20,02,35,339/- being difference between the book gains and indexed capital gain arising on transfer of STT paid securities be allowed while computing the book profit u/s 115JB.