, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !'# ! , % !& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.199/CHNY/2018 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 M/S L.J. INTERNATIONAL LTD., 60, RUKMANI LAKSHMIPATHY SALAI, EGMORE, CHENNAI - 600 008. PAN : AAACT 1149 C V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 4(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI M. SANJEEV ADITYA, CA -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R.V. AROON PRASAD, JCIT 1 / 2% / DATE OF HEARING : 17.10.2018 3') / 2% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 25.10.2018 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER: THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-8, CHENNAI, DA TED 28.11.2017 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISAL LOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE INCO ME-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT'). 2 I.T.A. NO.199/CHNY/18 3. SHRI M. SANJEEV ADITYA, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE F OR THE ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NO OBJECTION TO DIS ALLOW THE EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF THE EXEMPTED INCOME EARNED. IN THIS CASE, CERTAIN INVESTMENTS HAVE RESULTED IN TAX ABLE INCOME. THEREFORE, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, THE INVESTMENTS WHICH RESULTED IN TAXABLE INCOME HAVE TO BE EXCLUDED FROM COMPUTATION. IN OTHER WORDS, ACCORDING TO THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE, T HOSE INVESTMENTS WHICH RESULTED IN INCOME WHICH IS TAXABLE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF INCOME-TAX ACT, CANNOT BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISALLOWANCE UNDER RULE 8D(2) OF THE INCOME-TAX RUL ES, 1962. 4. WE HEARD SHRI R.V. AROON PRASAD, THE LD. DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. RULE 8D(2) INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962 AND SECTION 14A OF THE ACT CLEARLY SAY THAT THE EXPENDITURE INC URRED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR EARNING THE EXEMPTED INCOME HAS TO BE DISALLOWE D. IN THIS CASE, THE ASSESSEE CLAIMS THAT CERTAIN INVESTMENTS RESULTED I N TAXABLE INCOME. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHE REVER THE INCOME IS TAXABLE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF INCOME-TAX ACT, CAN NOT BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION FOR THE PURPOSE OF DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 8D(2) OF INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962. IN OTHER WORDS, THE INCOME WHICH IS OTHERWISE TAXABLE UNDER THE PROVISI ONS OF INCOME-TAX ACT, WOULD NOT FALL WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF SECTION 1 4A OF THE ACT. IN VIEW OF 3 I.T.A. NO.199/CHNY/18 THE ABOVE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS TO VERIFY WHET HER ANY PART OF INCOME IS TAXABLE UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE INCOME-TAX A CT. ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSING OFFICER SHALL RE-EXAMINE THE MATTER AFRESH AND BRING ON REC ORD THE INCOME EARNED BY THE ASSESSEE WHICH IS TAXABLE AND NON-TAX ABLE AND THEREAFTER DECIDE THE ISSUE AFRESH IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFT ER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 25 TH OCTOBER, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (. !'# ! ) ( . . . ) (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 5 /DATED, THE 25 TH OCTOBER, 2018. KRI. / -267 87)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 92 () /CIT(A)-8, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT, CHENNAI-4, CHENNAI 5. 7: -2 /DR 6. ;( < /GF.