I.T.C. Limited v. Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-3
[Citation -2019-LL-0917-55]
| Citation | 2019-LL-0917-55 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | I.T.C. Limited |
| Respondent Name | Principal Commissioner of Income-tax, Kolkata-3 |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF CALCUTTA |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 17/09/2019 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Bot Summary: | The Court : We have taken on record the reformulated proposed substantial questions of law arising in this appeal. They are as follows: Whether in a case where employees perform multiple functions, one of which is handling investments, the apportioned salary and expenses offered for disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be given a go by and rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, can be invoked Whether the tribunal was justified in law in rejecting the appellant s working and explanation for disallowance of Rs35,03,000/- under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in invoking sub-section of section 14A and rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 for disallowance of Rs.12,47,65,000/- and its purported findings in that behalf are arbitrary, unreasonable and perverse We do not think that any substantial question of law is raised. Only some questions of law arise which, according to Mr. Khaitan, learned senior advocate, have not been properly appreciated by the tribunal. Altogether throwing out the appeal might cause injustice to the appellant. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, we feel that the above questions of law should be referred to the tribunal. On remand, it shall decide both the legal and factual issues arising out of Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 as contained in the said questions and pass a reasoned order after hearing the parties within six months from the date of communication of the order. The impugned order of the tribunal dated 27th November, 2018 is set aside to the above extent. |