hcs 1 16.ia465.15 IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.465 OF 2015 WITH INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.650 OF 2015 Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-4 .. Appellant. Vs. M/s. Brahma Dev Holding and Trading Ltd. .. Respondent. Mr.A.R.Malhotra with Mr. N.A. Kazi for Appellant. Mr.S.G. Dalal for Respondent. CORAM : A.S. OKA & A.K. MENON, JJ. DATED : 6TH NOVEMBER, 2017 P.C. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing for appellant Revenue. challenge is to impugned judgment and order dated 18th September, 2014 which is common judgment and order in appeals preferred for assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. 2. substantial question of law which is tried to be pressed in service and formulated in paragraph 4 reads thus : (A) Whether, on facts and circumstances of case and in law, Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in deleting expenditure of Rs.70,97,777/- attributable towards earning exempt income ? 3. Learned members of Appellate Tribunal have relied upon decision of this Court in matter of Godrej and Boyce ::: Uploaded on - 13/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/11/2017 11:47:49 ::: 2 16.ia465.15 Manufacturing Co.Ltd. vs. DCIT1 view taken by this Court is that Rule 8(D) is not retrospective in nature and it will apply prospectively from assessment year 2008-09. 4. Hence, issues raised are covered by decision in Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Ltd (supra) which has attained finality. law is very clear that Rule 8(D) as well as Section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961 as amended with effect from 1st April, 2007 will apply prospectively. 5. Hence no substantial question of law arises. Appeals are dismissed. (A.K. MENON, J.) (A.S. OKA, J.) 1 (2010) 328 ITR (Bom.) ::: Uploaded on - 13/11/2017 ::: Downloaded on - 17/11/2017 11:47:49 ::: Principal Commissioner of Income-tax-4 v. Brahma Dev Holding and Trading Ltd