insertion of Rule 8D in the Income Tax Rules, 1962
CA Dilip (Financial Service) (181 Points)
31 March 2008CA Dilip (Financial Service) (181 Points)
31 March 2008
Sanjay
(CA)
(21 Points)
Replied 12 April 2008
The (iii) proviso is the additional disallwance inspite of proportionate disallaownace.
S.Srinivasaraghavan
(Chief Financial Officer and Co)
(11318 Points)
Replied 19 May 2008
That is one of the major lacuna pointed out in representations to the Government in the abovesaid rule
S.Srinivasaraghavan
(Chief Financial Officer and Co)
(11318 Points)
Replied 17 October 2008
It will be applicable for assessment year 2008-09.
Originally posted by :Guest | ||
" | As per notification and method of calculation allow amount is more than tax free Income. Than what will be disallow expenditure for the purpose of sec 14A ( for depriciation on motor car & fbt on it ) | " |
Kavith Thakkar
(Chartered Accountant)
(120 Points)
Replied 19 August 2009
Q. Whether disallowance u/s 14A can exceed the amount of exempt income? and further whether such an excess disallownace has to be mandatory made or not?
Varun Gandhi
(Business)
(40 Points)
Replied 05 January 2010
wel...
IT Authorities have been using this section as having retrospective effect i.e for all the assessments pending the time when this rule came into existence, ever since Mumbai special Bench,in case of ITO Vs Daga Capital Management (P) ltd.[2008], held that Rule 8D applies retrospectively on respect of all pending appeals.
Looking at it from a different angle, Sec 295(4) doesn't give power to the Board to give retrospective effect to any rule if its tends to prejudicially affect the interest of the assessee.
And thought the first two limbs of Rule 8D doesn't appear to affect the interest of the assessee but the THIRD limb i.e one half % of the average value of investment, income from which shall not form a part of total income.
Lets see what happens, LEts wait for the courts to decide whether this cam be applied RETROSPECTIVELY...