Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DEHRADUN BENCH, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & Dr. B.R.R. KUMAR
PER BENCH :
Both appeals have been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-Haldwani, dated 24.01.2017 & 23.03.2017 respectively. 2. Following grounds have been raised by the assessee: ITA No. 2299/Del/2017, A.Y. 2012-13
“1. That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in confirming the addition of Rs. 79,953/- as per section 14A.”
ITA No. 2300/Del/2017, A.Y. 2013-14
“1. That the learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in
2 ITA No.2299, 2300.Del.2017 Dr. Rakesh Kumar Jain
confirming the addition of Rs. 90,702/- as per Section 14A.”
The only issue involved in this case is disallowance u/s 14A.The assessee has shown the dividend income of Rs. 34,60,250/- and claimed the same as exempt under the provisions of the Income Tax Act. The Assessing Officer has disallowed one half percentage of average value of the investments on going to the record, we find that while resorting to the disallowance u/s 14A. We find that the Assessing Officer has not invoked the necessary satisfaction in accordance with the provisions of section 14A (2). Hence, the disallowance made by the AO and as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) cannot be held to be legally valid. 4. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in open court on this 10th day of November, 2021.
Sd/- Sd/-
(AMIT SHUKLA) (Dr. B.R.R.KUMAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER *Binita* Dated : 10/11/2021 Copy forwarded to: 1.Appellant 2.Respondent 3.CIT 4.CIT(A), New Delhi. 5.CIT(ITAT), New Delhi. AR, ITAT NEW DELHI.