HITESH S. SHAH, MUMBAI V. DCIT CEN CIR 17 & 28, MUMBAI

ITA 8213/MUM/2011

• Counselvise Citation: 821319914 RSA 2011
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-02-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Next Hearing Date: 06-01-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 07-12-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SU RENDRA KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: SANJAY PARIKH
• Section: 14A

Judgement Text

, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL H BENCH, M UMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.MITTAL,(JM) AND B.R.BHASKARAN (AM ) . . , . . , ./I.T.A. NO.8213/MUM/2011 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) SHRI HI TESH S SHAH, M/S LAXMI PLY AGENCY, 1, ABHISHEK BUILDING, VALLABHBHAI ROAD, VILE PARLE (W), MUMBAI-400056 / VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 17 AND 28, MUMBAI. ( % / APPELLANT) .. ( &% / RESPONDENT) ./ ./PAN/GIR NO. : AAKPS7606J % / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SANJAY PARIKH &% * /RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SURENDRA KUMAR * - / DATE OF HEARING : 26.2.2014 * - /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.2.2014 / O R D E R PER B.R.MITTAL, JM: THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL FOR ASSESSME NT YEAR 2008-09 AGAINST ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) DATED 30.8.2011 TO CONFIRM THE ACTION OF AO IN UPHOLDING THE DISALLOWANCE OF RS.6,29,505/- MADE UNDER SECTION 14 A OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT) READ WITH RULE 8D OF THE INCOME TAX RULE S, 1962. 2. WE HAVE HEARD LD. REPRESENTATIVES OF THE P ARTIES AND HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW. 3. WE OBSERVE THAT THE AO HAS MADE DISALLOWA NCE UNDER RULE 8D OF THE RULES. WE OBSERVE THAT AO WHILE MAKING DISALLOWANCE U/S 14 A OF THE ACT R.W.RULE 8D CALCULATED DISALLOWANCE OF INTEREST AT RS.8,24,237/-. HOWEVE R, AO HAS RESTRICTED THE DISALLOWANCE TO RS.6,29,505/- AFTER CONSIDERING THE FACT THAT TO TAL INTEREST PAID /PAYABLE AS PER ASSESSEES CALCULATION COMES TO RS.26,04,123/- BUT THE INTEREST ALLOWABLE IS RS.17,14,205/-. SINCE, THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED I NTEREST OF RS.23,43,710/-, THE EXCESS CLAIM, AS CALCULATED BY AO AT PAGE 5 OF THE ASSESS MENT ORDER COMES TO RS.6,29,505/-. I.T.A. NO.8213/MUM/2011 2 THEREFORE, AO RESTRICTED THE DISALLOWANCE TO RS.6, 29,505/- UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT R.W.RULE 8D OF THE RULES. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS CO NFIRMED THE ACTION OF THE AO. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT THERE W AS NO ADMINISTRATIVE EXPANSES CLAIMED BY ASSESSEE IN THE BALANCE SHEET AND THEREF ORE THE SUM OF RS.65,681/- AS CALCULATED BY AO SHOULD NOT BE DISALLOWED. WE OBSE RVE THAT THE SAID CONTENTION OF THE LD. AR HAS NO MERIT AS THE TOTAL DISALLOWANCE AS PE R RULE 8D COMES TO RS.8,89,919/- COMPRISING OF INTEREST OF RS.8,24,237/- AS PER RU LE 8D (I) AND WHEREAS THE TOTAL DISALLOWANCE MADE BY AO IS ONLY OF RS.6,29,505/- ONLY ON ACCOUNT OF EXCESS CLAIM OF INTEREST. THEREFORE, NO DISALLOWANCE ON ACCOUNT OF ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES HAS BEEN MADE BY AO. IN VIEW OF ABOVE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY R EASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). HENCE, GROUND OF APPEAL TAKEN BY ASSE SSEE IS REJECTED BY UPHOLDING THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DI SMISSED. THE ABOVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28TH FEBRUARY, 2014. 1 2 28TH FEBRUARY, 2014 * SD SD ( . . / B.R. BASKARAN ) ( . . /B.R.MITTAL) / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER / JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI: 28TH FEBRUARY, 2014. . . ./ SRL , SR. PS / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. % / THE APPELLANT 2. &% / THE RESPONDENT. 3. 8 ( ) / THE CIT(A)- CONCERNED 4. 8 / CIT CONCERNED 5. 9 &: , - : , / DR, ITAT, MUMBAI CONCERNED 6. / GUARD FILE. / BY ORDER, TRUE COPY (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) - : , /ITAT, MUMBAI