WALCHAND KAMDHENU COMMERCIALS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 5(3)(4), MUMBAI

The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of learned CIT(A) in confirming the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s. 14A of the Act.

Learned counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the assessee has held shares as stock-in-trade and has also made investments in group companies. Further own funds held by the assessee are far in excess of the investments made. She submitted that the tax authorities have computed the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act without considering these factual aspects. She further submitted that the identical issue was considered in assessee’s own case in and the Tribunal has restored the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer for considering the same afresh.

Learned Departmental Representative did not object to the plea put forth by learned AR.

Having heard the rival submissions, we are of the view that this issue should be restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for considering the same afresh, since various contentions urged by the assessee require fresh examination. We also noticed that the identical issue was restored to the file of the Assessing Officer by the Coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2009-10. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by learned CIT(A) on this issue and restore the same to the file of the Assessing Officer with the direction to examine the same afresh by duly considering various submissions that may be placed before him by the assessee.

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order has been pronounced in the Court on 11.7.2016