Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter:

ACIT vs. Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd (ITAT Chennai)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: July 26, 2013 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE:
CITATION:

Click here to download the judgement (Best_14A_Rule_8D_term_loans.pdf)


S. 14A/ Rule 8D: Interest on loans for specific taxable purposes to be excluded

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.
2 comments on “ACIT vs. Best & Crompton Engineering Ltd (ITAT Chennai)
  1. V P Rajan says:

    Once the decision of Bombay High Court in Godrej & Boyce came, the legislature must have thought that the AO neverthless gets a free hand to make disallowance under sec.14A. This judgment appears to be very judicious in the cases where it is possible to relate the interest to the specific borrowings.

  2. Sushil shah says:

    While reading this judgement one can sense the pain ofthe Assessee.

    We are witnessing one judgement per week related to section 14A rule 8D,.If these types of additions/ disallowances are made assessee has to file appeals, seek stay for the payment of dues etc.etc, which is very frustrating ..

    I beleive that the CBDT should come out with the celarccut instructions ( without infusing further confusion ), so as to save the time , energy and tension of the tax payer.

    We have observed that , in this situation the assessee feels very frustrated and helpless.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

Top