PESCO BEAM ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS PVT LTD.,SRIPERUMBUDUR vs. DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2), CHENNAI

आदेश / O R D E R

Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:-

Therefore the Ld.AO opined that provisions of Section 14A r.w.r.8D

(ii) & (iii) of the Rules will be applicable in the case of the assessee and accordingly worked out the disallowance at Rs.35,22,733/-. Thereafter the Ld.AO deducted Rs.11,68,255/- being the disallowance made earlier at the time of assessment U/s.143(3) of the Act vide order dated 26.12.2011. Thus the Ld.AO made an addition of Rs.23,54,471/-. On appeal the Ld.CIT(A) confirmed the order of the Ld.AO by observing as under:- “4.2 I have considered the submissions of the ld.AR and the findings of the AO in the assessment orders for the A.Y. 2009- 10. In this regard, Jurisdictional ITAT in the case of Rayala Corporation has held that the disallowance should be restricted to the extent of exempt income. In the appellant’s case, dividend income exempt has been declared at Rs.1,04,22,172/- and disallowance made by the Assessing Officer to the extent of Rs.35,22,733/-. Respectfully following the Jurisdictional ITAT’s decision cited herein above, I confirm the addition amounting to Rs.23,54,479/- made by the AO for A.Y. 2009-10. The grounds taken on this issue are dismissed.”

“5.2 We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials on record. It is apparent from the facts of the case, that the assessee has made huge investments in shares which earn dividend income exempt from tax. According to Section 14A of the Act the expenditure incurred towards earning exempt income cannot allowed as deduction from the taxable income of the assessee. In the case of the assessee, it is evident that for the process of decision making as to which shares the assessee has to invest, dis-invested, and at what point of time etc., will involve cost. Such expenditures incurred towards earning dividend income which is exempt from tax cannot be claimed as deduction from the taxable profit of the assessee company. As per the provisions of the Act, the assessee is bound to compute the actual expenses incurred by it towards investment that would earn exempt income and disallow the same. In the case of the assessee, such computation is neither made nor the expenditure towards earning exempt disallowed by the assessee. Therefore we are of the view that the Ld.AO was right in his realm to invoke the provisions of Section 14A r.w.r.8D of the Rules. Further it is pertinent to mention that there is no correlation between the dividend income earned by the assessee and the expenditure incurred by the assessee towards investment that earns exempt income. For example:- during a particular year the assessee would not have earned any dividend income though it has made heavy investments during the previous year or the earlier years, but the assessee is bound to incur cost for acquiring / maintaining /dis-investing such investments. Hence it cannot be inferred that the dividend income would be directly proportional to the expenditure incurred on the investment earning exempt income. Therefore we do not find any merit in the order of the Ld.CIT(A) for having restricted the disallowance U/s.14A of the Act to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee. However since the assessee has not computed its actual expenditure incurred towards the investment that earns exempt income, in the interest of justice, we remit back the matter to the file of Ld.AO for both the assessment years thereby affording one more opportunity to the assessee to work out the actual expenditure incurred by it towards the investment that earn exempt income and disallow the same. We further hereby direct the Ld.AO to verify the computation submitted by the assessee for both the assessment years and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with law and merit.”

Following the same ratio we hereby remit back the matter to the file of Ld.AO with similar directions.

Order pronounced on the 19th July, 2018 at Chennai.