Latest

10:58:00 AM
0

ACIT vs. Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd (ITAT Chennai)
Jul 26th, 2013

In AY 2009-10, the assessee contended that in computing the disallowance to be made u/s 14A and Rule 8D(2)(ii), the interest on bank loans and term loans taken for specific taxable purposes had to be excluded. The AO rejected the claim though the CIT(A) accepted it. On appeal by the department to the Tribunal, HELD:

Rule 8D(2)(ii) refers to expenditure by way of interest which is not directly attributable to any particular income or receipt. If loans have been sanctioned for specific projects/expansion and have been utilized towards the same, then obviously they could not have been utilized for making any investments having tax-free incomes and have to be excluded from the calculation to determine the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) (Champion Commercial Co. Ltd (ITAT Kol) followed)

Note: In Champion Commercial Co it was held that though the words in Rule 8D(2)(ii) are rigid, they had to be modified in view of the stand taken by the revenue before the Bombay High Court in Godrej & Boyce Mfg Co 328 ITR 81 that any expenditure by way of interest which is directly attributable to any particular income or receipt would be excluded.

0 comments:

Post a Comment