ACIT, GURGAON vs. M/S BAJAJ MOTORS LTD,, GURGAON

Date of Hearing : Date of Hearing : 28 Date of Hearing : Date of Hearing : 28 28-01 28 01 01-201 01 201 2016 201 Date of Order : Date of Order : 05-02-201 Date of Order : Date of Order : 201 2016 201

ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER H.S. SIDHU PER PER H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU : : : : JM H.S. SIDHU The Revenue has filed this Appeal against the Order dated 19.3.2013 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Faridabad relevant to assessment year 2006-07.

"Annexure 'A' Brief facts of the case :- Assessee filed its return of income on 28.11.2006 declaring income of Rs. 20,14,30,019/-. Assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act were completed vide order dated 02.12.2008 at an income of Rs: 20,17,25,295/-. Subsequently, re-assessment was completed u/s 147/143(3) of the Act on 30.12.2011 at income of Rs. 21,96,84,834/- after making additions on the following grounds:- i) Addition of Rs. 30,99,539/- u/s 36(1)(iii) was made, being interest paid on loan taken for raising capital assets which were not put to use during the relevant year. ii) Addition of Rs. 1,48,60,000/- was made u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. i) Addition of Rs. 30,99,539/- uls 36(1)(iii) was made, being interest paid on loan taken for raising capital assets which were not put to use during the relevant year. The A.O. made an disallowance of Rs. 30,99,539/- on account of interest paid on loans taken for acquiring capital assets not put to use for business during the year by invoking the provisions of section 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs. 27,56,008/- out of the addition of Rs. 33,99,539/- made by the A.O. taking into account the dates on which various items under the head capital works in progress were acquired along with their amounts. ii) Addition of Rs. 1.48,60,000/- was made uls 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961:-

The A.O. made an disallowance of Rs. 1,48,60,000/- u/s 14A of the Act. The Ld. CIT(A) has deleted the addition of Rs. 1,45,74,953/- out of the addition of Rs. 1,48,60,000/- made by the A.O. by observing that the assessee made investment of Rs. 14.86 crores in tax free mutual funds but got them redeemed after a short period of time & reinvested the redeemed amount in mutual funds with a view to earn short-term profit. The amount of interest disallowable was worked out on the basis of no. of days for which a certain amount was invested taking 7% rate of interest. The order of the Ld CIT(A) has not been found acceptable on the above issues, hence further appeal to the ITAT is recommended in this case on the below mentioned grounds:- ( In the case of MIS MIS Bajaj Motors Ltd., Village-Narsinghpur, Gurga~n for the assessment year 2006-07) 7. Decision by the CIT on the scrutiny report A. Issue wise decision of the CIT, as to whether appeal is to be filed or not, may be recorded, with reasons, keeping in view the line of argument the DR is expected to take before ITAT at the time of hearing: Issue No 1. :- As per annexure- 'A' Issue No.2 :- Not applicable. Aggregate tax effect on issues proposed to be contested in the ITAT Rs.54 35 855/-

B. Grounds of appeal to be raised before the ITAT may be framed in respect of the issues not accepted by the CIT.

1. Whether the Ld. CIT(A) was right in law in accepting additional evidence without calling remand report from the A.O. regarding dates of purchase of the capital assets under consideration despite the fact that the assessee was not prevented by any of the clauses mentioned in Rule 46A of the IT Rules.

2. Whether the Ld. CIT(A} was right in law in restricting the disallowance to Rs. 3,43,531/- instead of Rs. 30,99,539/- made by the A.O. u/s 36(1}(iii} of the Act on account of interest paid on loan taken for purchase of capital assets which were not put to use during the period under consideration. 3. Whether the Ld. CIT(A} was justified in restricting the disallowance to Rs. 2,85,047/- against the disallowance of Rs. 1,48,60,000/- made by the A.O. u/s 14A of the IT Act on investment of Rs. 14.86 crores made by the assessee in assets deriving exempt income. 4. "The appellant craves for the permission to add, delete or amend the grounds of appeal before or at the time of hearing of appeal. " C. In case of a combined order or order in a group case, involving more than one assessee falling under jurisdiction of different CsIT, the CIT shall communicate the stand taken on common issues to the CIT having jurisdiction over other case(s). A. Categorization of final decision by CIT :- B(i} A. The appeal is not to be filed i. As the order is acceptable on merits, or ii. Even though the order is not acceptable, appeal is not being filed only on the consideration that the tax effect is less than the limit prescribed in CBDT's Instruction on monetarylirnits.

B. Appeal is to be filed on the 'grounds of appeal

' framed above i. As the order is not acceptable on merits, or ii. Though tax effect is below the prescribed limit, the case falls under the exceptions (to be specified) of the Instruction of CBDT on monetary limits. iii. Authorisation under section 253(2) of the LT. Act is issued separately. Appeal to be filed accordingly. Dated :29.05.2013 Sd/- ( Neena Kumar) Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad

3. No doubt that the Ld. CIT, Faridabad vide his order 29.5.2013 passed u/s. 253(2) of the I.T. Act has directed the ACIT, Circle-I, Gurgaonn to file the Appeal before the ITAT, Delhi against the order dated 19.3.2013 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-Faridabad on the grounds mentioned above, but the ACIT, Circle-I, Gurgaon has not applied his mind while filing the present appeal before the Tribunal and he filed the grounds of appeal without his signatures and by enclosing the Annexure-A containing the Facts and Grounds signed by CIT, Faridabad which is contrary to the provisions of section 253(2) of the I.T. Act.

Therefore, the present Appeal is defective and is not maintainable in the eyes of law.

Order pronounced in the Open Court on 05/02/2016.