Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax 11(2), Room No.479, 4th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Shri Gajendrakumar T. Agrawal, 325, 3rd Floor, Madhu Mansion, Kalbadevi Rd., Mumbai 400 002
November, 06th 2014
                      MUMBAI BENCH "J", MUMBAI


                                ITA No.1985/M/2011
                              Assessment Year: 2007-08

        Asstt.    Commissioner      of       Shri      Gajendrakumar   T.
        Income-tax 11(2),                    Agrawal,
        Room No.479, 4th Floor,              325, 3rd Floor,
        Aayakar Bhavan,                      Madhu Mansion,
        M.K. Road,                           Kalbadevi Rd.,
        Mumbai - 400020                      Mumbai ­ 400 002.
                                             PAN: AABPA 7286R
             (Appellant)                        (Respondent)

      Assessee by                 : Shri S.L. Jain, A.R.
      Revenue by                  : Shri Mohammed Rizwan, JCIT-DR

      Date of Hearing             : 21.08.2014
      Date of Pronouncement       : 31.10.2014


Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

      The present appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order dated
14.12.2010 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [(hereinafter
referred to as CIT(A)] relevant to assessment year 2007-08.
      The sole issue taken in this appeal is regarding the disallowance of
interest expenses under section 14A of the Income Tax Act.

2.    The brief facts are that the assessee had declared dividend income of
Rs.20,65,969/-. The Assessing Officer (hereinafter referred to as the AO)
observed that assessee had claimed interest expenditure of Rs.42,64,854/- in
respect of investments made in purchase of shares and also for transactions
carried out in derivatives.     Assessee was asked to furnish computation of
                                        2                              ITA No.1985/M/2011
                                                             Shri Gajendrakumar T. Agrawal

disallowance u/s.14A as per Rule 8D. Assessee remained silent on the issue
and also not denied that provisions of section 14A would apply.                     AO,
therefore, computed disallowance u/s.14A as per Rule 8D on interest and
expenses which worked out to Rs.14,36,032/-.

3.    In appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee submitted that the assessee
had not incurred any interest expenditure in relation to investments made.
From the profit and loss account it was shown that the assessee had paid
interest by way of bank interest of Rs.6,76,050/- and further to Kotak
Mahindra Investment Ltd. of Rs.35,88,804/-. The assessee had also received
income of Rs.5,79,419/- during the year. The interest paid to Kotak Mahindra
Investment Ltd. was related to assessee's transactions in derivatives and not to
the investment in questions from which the dividend income was received.
The submissions of the assessee has have been reproduced by the ld. CIT(A) in
his order are for the sake of convenience are extracted as under:
      "Appellant   has inter alia submitted that he was holding investment of
      Rs.20363151/- as on 31-3-06. Out of such investments, investments were
      sold for Rs.13686045/- in the months of May, August and December 06 as
      well as in the months of January & March 07. Cost of shares sold out of
      opening stock is Rs.39757291- (page 9-11). Appellant purchased fresh shares
      in the months of April and May 06 of Rs.4628555/- (page 12). No other
      investment has been made in the current year. It is submitted that
      investment in shares of Viceroy Hotels on 25-4-06 of Rs.2383540/- has been
      made out of amount received of Rs.18.00 lakhs and Rs.11,20,0001on 3-5-06
      from G. T. Agarwal HUF to whom the loan was advanced by the appellant
      (page 13). Shares of Rs.7,10,000/- were purchased on 4-5-2005 for which the
      payment has been made on 15-5-06 out of the amount received from share
      broker on 11-5-06. On 9-5-06 payment has been made of Rs.7,35,883/- for
      acquisition of Viceroy Hotel out of amount of Rs.16.00 lakhs received from
      share broker (page 14). Copies of statement of HOFC Bank as well as Bank of
      India are enclosed herewith. Appellant has acquired shares of Rs.7,50, 000/-
      of Anemos Lifestyles Pvt. Ltd. on 28-11-06. There was a loan advanced to the
      said company as on 1-4-06 of Rs.10.00 lakhs. A copy of account is enclosed
      herewith (page 15). Other shares of Rs.50,000/- has been acquired in the
      company G.T. Stock Vision Pvt. Ltd. which are also acquired out of appellant's
                                           3                              ITA No.1985/M/2011
                                                                Shri Gajendrakumar T. Agrawal

        own funds. The overdraft account in the Bank Statement of HDFC Bank is on
        account of the share dealing and not due to utilization of investments in
        shares. Thus, all shares have been acquired out of appellant's own funds.

             A reference to the P& L Account as on 31-3-06 will show that total
        interest claimed was of Rs.496385/- and interest received was Rs.1745960-.
        Thus, no interest was paid on shares invested till 31-3-06. In the current year
        fresh purchase of shares is of Rs.4628555/- as against sale realized of
        Rs.13716670/-. The interest paid of Rs.35,88,804/- is directly related to
        derivative transactions of the appellant. Interest paid to the Bank is
        Rs.6,76,050/-and interest received by the assessee is of Rs.579419/-, leaving
        the net debit at Rs.96631-. It clearly shows that no borrowed funds has been
        utilized in purchase of shares by the appellant and hence no part of the
        interest is disallowable.

            With reference to disallowance out of the expenses of Rs.103448/-, we
        draw your kind attention towards P&L Account, as placed at page 2. A
        reference to the same will show that total expenses claimed, other than
        interest, are of Rs.137173/-. The main activity of the appellant has been
        derivative trading. In view of the total expenses incurred of Rs.137173/-,
        there is no justification for disallowing expense of Rs.103448/-, which is on
        the higher side. Your honour will appreciate that for earning of the dividend,
        no expense is required to be incurred."

4.      The ld. CIT(A), after going through the submissions of the assessee and
the evidence on record, held that the assessee had successfully explained that
the investments in question were made by the assessee from his own funds and
sale proceeds and that interest bearing funds were not used in purchasing the
shares. He therefore held that disallowance of interest was not attracted in this

5.      Since the ld. CIT(A) has given a categorical finding that no borrowed
funds were used for the purpose of investment, hence under such
circumstances he rightly held that the disallowance of interest expenditure
under section 14A in relation to dividend income was not warranted in this
                                              4                           ITA No.1985/M/2011
                                                                Shri Gajendrakumar T. Agrawal

         The ld. D.R. could not point out from the facts on the file that the
assessee had used interest bearing funds in this case for the purpose of earning
of dividend income.

5.1      We do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) in this regard
and the same is accordingly upheld.

6.       In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is therefore dismissed.

                  Order pronounced in the open court on 31.10.2014.

         Sd/-                                                   Sd/-
    (R.C. Sharma)                                           (Sanjay Garg)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                       JUDICIAL MEMBER

Mumbai, Dated: 31.10.2014.
* Kishore, Sr. P.S.

Copy to: The Appellant
        The Respondent
        The CIT, Concerned, Mumbai
        The CIT (A) Concerned, Mumbai
        The DR Concerned Bench
//True Copy//                             [

                                                  By Order

                                 Dy/Asstt. Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai.
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2023 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting