Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D in respect of exempted income

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
 DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI

BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
AND
SH. MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER
 (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)

ITA No.781/Del/2018
 Assessment Year: 2013-14

Punjab & Sind Bank
HO. Accounts & Audit
Department, 1st Floor, 21,
Rajendra Place,
New Delhi-110008
PAN No. AAACP1206G

Vs

ACIT
Circle – 20 (1)
New Delhi
 (RESPONDENT) 

ITA No.1208/Del/2018
 Assessment Year: 2013-14

ACIT
Circle – 20 (1)
New Delhi

Vs

Punjab & Sind Bank
HO. Accounts & Audit
Department, 1st Floor,21,
Rajendra Place,
New Delhi-110008
PAN No. AAACP1206G
 (RESPONDENT)

Appellant by Sh. Vivek Gupta, CA
Respondent by Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR
Sh. Gourav Pundib, Sr. DR.

Date of hearing: 12/07/2021
Date of Pronouncement: 12/07/2021

ORDER

PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM:

 ITA No.781/Del/2018 and ITA 1208/Del/2018 are cross appeals by the assessee and revenue preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-7, New Delhi dated 05.12.2017 pertaining to A.Y. 2013-14.

2. Both these appeals were heard together and are being disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience.

3. The grievance of the assessee read as under :-

1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and provisions of the law, the learned CIT(Appeal) has erred in sustaining the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D of Rs.85,98,000/-, (i.e.14% of average investments against exempted income) in respect of exempted income of Rs.4,77,67,907/-.

2. That in light of the ground no.1 above, the learned CIT(Appeal) has erred in sustaining the addition of Rs.85,98,000/- to book profit under MAT (section 115JB) in respect of exempted income.

3. That on the facts & circumstances of the case and provisions of the law, the learned Assessing Officer has erred in not granting the TDS credit of Rs.2,06,817/-. The Id CIT(Appeal) has also erred in not fully appreciating and adjudicating this issue in light of our submissions made before him resulting into passing of non-speaking order which is against principle of natural justice. 

4. That the appellants request be allowed to add, modify and delete any other ground (s) of appeal

4. The grievance of the revenue read as under :-

1) On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT (A) erred in law and facts in deleting the addition of Rs. 17,63,07,641/- made by the AO in respect of depreciation on securities.

2) On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT (A) erred in law and facts in deleting disallowance of Rs. 1,87,35,15,770/- made by the AO out of contribution to P & S Bank employees Pension Fund Trust.

3) On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1277.85 lakhs made by the AO u/s 14A read with rule under rule 8D(2)(ii).

4) On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT (A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1,87,35,15,770/- made by the AO out of contribution to P & S Bank employees Pension Fund Trust while computing book profit u/s 115JB.

5) On the facts and under the circumstances of the case, the Ld.CIT(A) erred in law and facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1277.85 lakhs made by the AO u/s 14A read with rule under rule 8D(2)(ii) while computing book profit u/s 115JB

6) The appellant craves to be allowed to add and alter any fresh ground(s) of appeal and/or delete or amend any of the ground (s) of appeal. 

To know more in details find the attachment file