JSW INVESTMENT PVT LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT 5 (2)(1), MUMBAI

Since both the appeals of the revenue and assessee based on similar facts and identical issue are directed against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-10, Mumbai, therefore for the sake of convenience both the appeals are adjudicated together in this order.

At the outset the ld. counsel during the course of appellate proceedings before us contended that assessee has applied in writing vide letter dated 14.01.2022 to withdraw the instant appeal.

Heard both the sides and perused the material. Vide letter dated 14.01.2022 the assessee has requested to withdraw this appeal the relevant part of the letter is mentioned as under: “Under instructions, it is submitted that the grounds raised for this year have become academic. This is because the corresponding reduced loss has lapsed. It is for this reason that the appellant does not wish to press this appeal for this year. The same may be disposed accordingly.” Considering the requests of the assessee to withdraw the appeal as above, the appeal of the assessee is treated as withdrawn. Therefore, the appeal of the assessee is stand dismissed.

During the course of assessment the assessing officer has computed disallowance u/s 14A r.w.rule 8D of the I.T Rule to the amount of Rs.87,04,68,604/- u/s 14A of the Act in respect of dividend income of Rs.63,24,63,668/- claimed as exempt by the assessee u/s 10(34) of the Act.

In the appeal the ld. CIT(A) has restricted the disallowance to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee after following the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of PCIT Vs. State Bank of Patiala (99 taxmann 286). Since the issue on hand being squarely covered by cases cited (supra), therefore, we don’t find any infirmity in the decision of ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, the appeal of the Revenue stand dismissed.

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed.