CIT vs. SUNSTAR OVERSEAS LTD

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 1240/2011 . . . CIT ..... Appellant . Through: Mr. Kiran Babu, Sr. Standing Counsel . versus . . . SUNSTAR OVERSEAS LTD ..... Respondent . Through: None . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 29.11.2011 . . . We are not inclined to issue notice on this appeal as the issue is already covered against the Revenue by a decision of this Court dated 18th November, 2011 in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT, New Delhi in ITA No.687/2009, inter alia holding that Rule 8D is not retrospective. However, in the said decision it has been directed that the expenses both direct and indirect relating to the exempt income should be computed and disallowed. In the present case, the Tribunal has directed as under:- . ?Considering the facts of the case and the submissions made before us, we think it fit to restore the matter to the file of the AO to recompute the disallowance on the basis of the decision in the case of Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (supra). It may be emphasized that Rule 8D is not applicable to the proceedings of this year. It may also be mentioned that in case any other decision of the High Court including Hon?ble Delhi High Court is received before passing the order of the AO, the same shall also be taken into account by him. In other words, this ground shall be adjudicated again as per law after hearing the assessee. Thus, this ground is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.? . . . The Assessing Officer while implementing the directions issued by the Tribunal shall keep the decision of the Delhi High Court in mind. Liberty is granted to the parties to file an application in this appeal, if there is any difficulty in implementation. . The appeal is disposed of. . . . . . SANJIV KHANNA, J . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . NOVEMBER 29, 2011 . mm . . . 56 .