Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Thus, further aggrieved by the order of ld. CIT(A), the assessee has filed the present appeal before us.

3. We have heard the submission of ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue and perused the material available on record. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that initially the return was processed under section 143(1) by intimation dated 28.10.2013. The assessee filed revised return of income on 31.03.2014 declaring loss of Rs. 17.79 Crore. In the revised return, the suo moto disallowance under section 14A was revised to Rs. 1,20,68,640/-. The Assessing Officer while completing the assessment rejected the revised return on the ground that intimation under section 143(1)(a) was passed before filing revised return and therefore revised return was invalid. During the assessment, the assessee made detailed explanation to the show-cause notice issued for disallowance under section 14A vide details dated 22.01.2015 and furnished incremental cash flow statement, balance-sheet with the computation of Net interest free fund and thus established that interest free fund of the assessee was in far excess of making investment in yielding tax free income. The Assessing Officer not accepted the claim of assessee and rejected the assessee's computation. The Assessing Officer without going through the statement furnished by the assessee concluded that assessee has not established that borrowed fund have not been utilized for investment and disallowed interest applying Rule 8D. The ld. CIT(A), though concluded that the revised return filed by assessee was valid, however, the disallowance made by Assessing Officer was confirmed with his observation that the assessee could not established that entire investment is made out of own fund. The ld. CIT(A) failed to consider the order passed by Tribunal in ITA No. 7408/Mum/2014 and ITA No. 194 to 196/Mum/2015 dated 03.08.2016 for Assessment Year 2008-09 to 2011-12.

CIT(A) allowed the ground of the assessee that assessee filed revised return of income in accordance with the provision of section 139(5) of the Act and treated the revised return as valid return. However, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the action of Assessing Officer on taking view that the assessee could not established that entire investment has been made out of own funds, thereby confirmed the action of Assessing Officer.

7. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee vehemently submitted that ld. CIT(A) by following the decision of Tribunal for Assessment Year 2008-09 to 2011-12 in ITA No. 7408/Mum/2014 for Assessment Year 2010-11 and ITA No. 194 to 196/Mum/15 and ITA No. 7512/Mum/2014 for Assessment Year 2008-09 to 2011-12, the ld CIT(A) in subsequent assessment year 2013-14 and 2014-15 allowed the relief to the assessee vide order dated 18.12.2017. We have noted that the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No. 7408/Mum/2014 for Assessment Year 2010-11 and ITA No. 194 to 196/Mum/15 and ITA No. 7512/Mum/2014 for Assessment Year 2008-09 to 2011-12 almost on identical grounds, passed the following order: