Accordingly, the dividend on investment exempt under Section 10 23G was companysidered by the O. for the purpose of disallowance U S.14A. Hence, proportionate interest relating to investment on which exemption u s.10 23G is available as per the working amounting to Rs.26 crores was disallowed U S.14A r.w.s.
The claim was rejected and Assessing Officer had valued the immovable property independently of Rule 1BB.
2165 of 2012 This appeal has been filed against the judgment of Bombay High Court dated 12.09.2011 in Income Tax Appeal L No.
Appeal by the Revenue before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was also dismissed.
For Assessment Year 197778 and 197879 assessment order was passed on 08.02.1983 by which time Rule 1 BB had been introduced in the Rule.
Appeal preferred by assessee was allowed.
The assessee companytended that properties to be valued applying the Rule 1BB.
The threeJudge Bench also referred to Departmental Circular dated 24.07.1976, which was found relevant for interpreting for finding out the nature of the amended provision.
Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai Anr.
