MOTILAL OSWAL FINANCIAL SERVICES LTD,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT RG 3(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5840/MUM/2014Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 March 2019AY 2011-127 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the deletion of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) as the assessee had sufficient own funds to cover investments. For disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii), the issue was remanded to the AO for fresh adjudication due to a non-speaking order from the CIT(A).

What were the facts?

The assessee, a non-banking company, challenged the disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed the disallowance, which was calculated using Rule 8D.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D is justified when the assessee has sufficient own funds to cover investments, and the validity of disallowance of common expenses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU (VP) & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM)

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (AR)
For Respondent: Shri S.K. Mishra (DR)
Hearing: 21/12/2018Pronounced: 18/03/2019

आदेश प्रतितिति अग्रेतिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपील र्थी / The Appellant 2. प्रत्यर्थी / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आय क्त(अपील) / The CIT(A)-

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →