MANGALKAMNA SUPPLIERS PVT. LTD,KOLKATA vs. CIT(A), NFAC, IT, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 534/KOL/2023Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata24 July 2023AY 2015-163 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal set aside the issue of disallowance under Section 14A to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination. The AO was directed to consider the Delhi High Court's ruling in Era Infrastructure and provide the assessee an opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 3 days, which was condoned. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, and the appeal was decided based on the Revenue's submission and available records.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the disallowance of expenses under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, particularly when no exempt income was earned. The applicability of the Delhi High Court's judgment in Era Infrastructure was also considered.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 144,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE

Hearing: 13/07/2023Pronounced: 24/07/2023

O R D E R

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

1.

The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dated 27/03/2023, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2015-16.

2.

The Registry has pointed out that there is a delay of 3 (three) days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal. The assessee has filed a petition for condonation stating the reasons for the said delay. After perusing the same, we are convinced that the assessee was prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time. Accordingly, we condone the delay and proceed to admit the appeal for hearing.

3.

None appeared on behalf of the assessee when the case was called out for hearing. The Director of the assessee company has filed Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mangalkamna Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. 2 an application for adjournment. However, on perusal of the grounds of appeal

, we find that the only issue that arises for our consideration in this appeal is regarding the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D. Therefore, in our opinion, this case is not fit for grant of adjournment and the same is being disposed off after hearing the ld. D/R and perusing the material available on record.

4. We have heard the ld. D/R and perused the material placed before us. Vide Ground No. 5, the assessee has submitted that, there is no exempt income earned generated during the year or likely to be generated from the investments made and hence the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D, is uncalled for. The ld. Assessing Officer has passed an ex-parte order u/s 144 of the Act. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. (ITA 204/2022) judgment dt. 20/07/2022, has held that the amendment made in Section 14A of the Act by Finance Act, 2022, will be applicable prospectively and also held that disallowance u/s 14A of the Act should not exceed the exempt income earned by the assessee during the year.

5. Accordingly, we set aside the issue to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to examine the issue of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act in the light of the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Era Infrastructure (supra) after providing the assessee sufficient opportunity of being heard. In case the assessee is able to prove that no exempt income was earned during the year then, under Assessment Year: 2015-16 Mangalkamna Suppliers Pvt. Ltd. 3

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →