Govind Dham Private Limited, Kolkata V. ITO, Ward - 6(2), Kolkata, Kolkata

ITA 737/KOL/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 48143 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-05-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 13-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MALAKAR
• Keywords: Rule 8D
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

, , , , , , ,, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : KOLKATA [ . . . . . .. . , , ! ! ! ! , , ,, , ] [BEFORE HONBLE SHRI S.V. MEHROTRA, AM & HONBLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM] !' !' !' !' / I.T.A NO. 737/KOL/2010 #$ %& #$ %& #$ %& #$ %&/ // / ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2006-07 GOVIND DHAM PRIVATE LIMITED -VS.- INCOME TAX OFFICER/WARD-6(2) KOLKATA. [ PAN : AAACG 9252 B] KOLKATA. [ () /APPELLANT ] [ +,()/ RESPONDENT ] () / FOR THE APPELLANT : NONE +,() / FOR THE RESPONDENT : - / SHRI S. K. MALAKAR . /ORDER [ . . . . . .. . , ] PER S.V. MEHROTRA, A. M. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-07 AGAINST ORDER OF CIT(A)- VI, KOLKATA DATED 05.01.2010. 2. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE NOR THER E IS ANY APPLICATION FOR ADJOURNMENT. WE, THEREFORE, DECIDED TO DISPOSE OF THE APPEAL AFT ER HEARING THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD . 3. THE ASSESSEE-COMPANY, IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR, WAS ENGAGED IN DEALING IN SHARES AND SECURITIES. IT HAD FILED ITS RETURN OF I NCOME OF RS.20,15,770/-. IN THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO SE GREGATE THE EXPENSES RELATING TO DIVIDEND INCOME AND LONG TERM CAPITAL GAIN. FURTHER, ASSESSE E WAS REQUIRED TO EXPLAIN WHY THE PORTFOLIO MANAGEMENT CHARGES SHOULD BE ALLOWED AS BUSINESS EX PENDITURE. THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED THE EXPENSES RELATING TO EARNING OF EXEM PTED INCOME U/S. 14A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT ON PROPORTIONATE BASIS AMOUNTING TO RS.6,20,053 /-. THE LD. CIT(A) CONFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. [ ITA NO. 737/KOL/2010] 2 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF BOTH THE P ARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE RECORDS OF THE CASE. THE ASSESSEES CLAIM BEFORE THE LD. CI T(A) WAS THAT EVEN IF RULE 8D IS APPLIED, THE DISALLOWANCE WILL BE RS.43,249/-. FURTHER, EVEN ON THE BASIS OF PROPORTIONATE DISALLOWANCE, THE DISALLOWANCE WOULD BE LESS THAN AS MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION IS 2006-07 AND THEREFORE, RULE 8D WAS NOT APPLICABLE IN THIS YEAR BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE DISALLOWANCE WAS TO BE MADE ON S OME REASONABLE BASIS. IN VIEW OF ABOVE CONTENTIONS, WE CONSIDER IT PROPER, IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE, TO RESTORE THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO DECIDE THE ISSUE DEN OVO BY MAKING THE DISALLOWANCE U/S. 14A OF THE ACT ON SOME REASONABLE BASIS. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FORS STATISTICAL PURPOSES. . . . . / / / / 0 /# 1 2 0 /# 1 2 0 /# 1 2 0 /# 1 2 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN C OURT ON 31. 05. 2011. SD/- SD/- [ ! , ] [ . ., ] [ MAHAVIR SINGH ] [S.V. M EHROTRA , ] JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT M EMBER (4) DATED : 31ST MAY, 2011. . 6 + 7 87%/ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. () /APPELLANT- GOVIND DHAM PRIVATE LIMITED,, CONTINE NTAL CHAMBERS, 4 TH FLOOR, 15A, HEMANTA BASU SARANI, KOLKATA-700001. 2 +,() / RESPONDENT : INCOME TAX OFFICER/WARD-6(2), P-7, C HOWRINGHEE SQUARE, KOLKATA-700 069. 3. .#/ THE CIT, 4. .# ()/ THE CIT(A), KOLKATA. 5. 1 + #/ DR, KOLKATA BENCHES, KOLKATA [,7 + / TRUE COPY] .#// BY ORDER, !? /DEPUTY/ASSTT REGISTRAR [ KKC @A #B? C /SR.PS]