Case Law Details
Essel Mining & Industries Ltd. Vs DCIT (ITAT Kolkata)
From the perusal of the balance sheet of the assessee it was found that assessee was having sufficient own funds at its disposal for the purpose of making investments and accordingly it could be held that no borrowed funds were utilized for making investments. Hence, there could not be any disallowance of interest under second limb of rule 8D(2) of the rules read with section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961.
FULL TEXT OF THE ITAT JUDGMENT
1. This appeal was earlier disposed off by this tribunal in ITA No. 786 & 2073/Kol/2013 (cross appeals) for the Asst Year 2008-09 vide order dated 10.3.2017. Later a Miscellaneous Application was preferred by the assessee in M.A.No. 108/Kol/2017 for non-consideration of the tribunal decision passed in assessee’s own case with regard to the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. This Miscellaneous Application of the assessee was disposed off by this tribunal in M.A.No. 108/Kol/2017 dated 10.11.2017 by holding as under:-
1. In view of the above we hold that the mistake apparent from the record has occurred in the order passed by this Hon’ble ITAT in pursuance to the provisions of section 254(2) of the Act. We therefore recall the impugned order for the limited purpose of adjudication of the disallowance made by the AO under section 14A of the Act. Accordingly the registry is directed to fix the case for hearing in due course of time. Hence the ground filed by the assessee in Miscellaneous Application is allowed.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
