Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI RAJESH KUMAR & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI
Per Rajesh Kumar, Accountant Member:
The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 31.10.2017 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2013-14.
The Revenue has raised various grounds challenging the order of the Ld. CIT(A) whereby the Ld. CIT(A) has directed the AO to exclude those investments which did not yield any exempt income during the year and calculate the disallowance under section 14A of the Act accordingly. After perusing the facts on record and hearing the rival parties, we observe that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs.
2 M/s. Tata Petrodyne Ltd. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 82 taxman.com 415 (Del-Tri.- Special Bench) wherein the Hon’ble Special Bench has held that only those investments are to be considered for the purpose of computing average investments which yielded exempt income during the year. We, therefore, respectfully following the same are inclined to dismiss the appeal of the Revenue.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21.08.2019.