Case Law Details
Assessing Officer made addition of Rs.2,56,019/-, u/s 14A of the I.T. Act, 1961 read with Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules, 1962, against which assessee preferred appeal. The authorized representative of the assessee vide written submission dated 04.10.2011 has argued as under:
“During the year under consideration the appellant received dividend income on surplus funds invested with various mutual funds through Citibank who acted as investment adviser with no cost to the appellant company. The dividends were directly credited to the bank account of the appellant electronically by ECS. No interest was paid by the appellant during the year. As such, the appellant did not incur any expenditure on earning dividend income and section 14A and the I.T. Act, 1961 did not apply.”
We have heard Ld.DR, considered the material on record and find that latest decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. C.I.T., New Delhi (203 Taxman 364) has come which has duly been considered by CIT(A) while upholding the order of the Assessing Officer. Since neither any contrary material has been placed on record nor any higher court’s order is filed with appeal papers, therefore, we do not find any ground to interfere in the impugned order, which is upheld and appeal of assessee is dismissed.
INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI
ITA No.1668/Del./2012 – Assessment Year: 2008-09 Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
