Taxpublishers.in - InterestingDecision/Flash_16203.htm - Tax Publishers Your Tax Solution Hub

Share via Whatsapp 209 Views


The Tax Publishers Dy. CIT v. Mahindra Infrastructural Projects Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 5827/Mum/2013, dt. 7-4-2016] : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 2132 (Mum-Trib) Disallowance under section 14A in case of controlling interest *Facts:* Assessee in the business of estate had invested in a controlllng entity out of strategic reasons. Dividends arose from such entity. Question of disallowability of section 14A arose by the assessing officer. Aggrieved assessee went in appeal where Commissioner (Appeals) remanded back to assessing officer to compute the disallowance appropriately. Similar issue arose in the subsequent years. Because Commissioner (Appeals) had remanded it back for correct computation department went in appeal: Held in favour of the assessee that the disallowance requires correct computation thus no interference with orders of Commissioner (Appeals) was warranted. The reason of investment being strategic in nature was whittled down by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the earlier years itself holding that controlling interest or no controlling interest the income of dividend was exempt also section 14A rule 8D being read retrospective some disallowance was mandated.

The Tax Publishers

Dy. CIT v. Mahindra Infrastructural Projects Pvt. Ltd. [ITA No. 5827/Mum/2013, dt. 7-4-2016] : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 2132 (Mum-Trib)

Disallowance under section 14A in case of controlling interest

Facts:

Assessee in the business of estate had invested in a controlllng entity out of strategic reasons. Dividends arose from such entity. Question of disallowability of section 14A arose by the assessing officer. Aggrieved assessee went in appeal where Commissioner (Appeals) remanded back to assessing officer to compute the disallowance appropriately. Similar issue arose in the subsequent years. Because Commissioner (Appeals) had remanded it back for correct computation department went in appeal:

Held in favour of the assessee that the disallowance requires correct computation thus no interference with orders of Commissioner (Appeals) was warranted.

The reason of investment being strategic in nature was whittled down by the Commissioner (Appeals) in the earlier years itself holding that controlling interest or no controlling interest the income of dividend was exempt also section 14A rule 8D being read retrospective some disallowance was mandated.