Ajay Kumar Mittal, J. - (1.) This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Sec. 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, "the Act") against the order dated 18.6.2015, Annexure A.3 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh Benches - 'SMC' in ITA No. 978/Chd/2013 for the assessment year 2009 -10, claiming following substantial question of law: - "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT is justified in law to hold that the disallowance made under Sec. 14A read with Rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income, in the absence of any such restriction being there in the relevant Sec. or rule -
(2.) A few facts relevant for the decision of the controversy involved as narrated in the appeal may be noticed. The assessee is a company engaged in the business of manufacturing and sale of corrugate boxes and sheet. It filed its return of income for the assessment year in question declaring loss of Rs. 64,455/ -. The assessee had made investment in shares and mutual funds amounting to Rs. 10,87,172/ - and declared dividend income of Rs. 1,11,564/ - and agricultural income of Rs. 32,000/ -. As the agricultural income and dividend income are exempt incomes, the Assessing Officer made disallowance of Rs. 4,09,675/ - by invoking the provisions of Sec. 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short, "the Rules"). Aggrieved by the order, the assessee filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 18.7.2013, Annexure A.2, the CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal. Still not satisfied, the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 18.6.2015, Annexure A.3, the Tribunal set aside the order passed by the CIT (A) and remitted the matter to the Assessing Officer with the direction to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. Hence the instant appeal by the revenue.
(3.) We have heard learned counsel for the appellant -revenue.;