DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(2), HYDERABAD vs. HEAD INFOTECH INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, HYDERABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 464/HYD/2018Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 September 2020AY 2013-143 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue were not emanating from the Assessing Officer's or CIT(A)'s orders. The additions made by the AO were under different sections, and no disallowance was made under Section 14A.

What were the facts?

The Revenue filed an appeal against the CIT(A)'s order for AY 2013-14. The grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue pertained to finance expenses and disallowance under Section 14A.

What were the issues?

Whether the grounds of appeal raised by the Revenue were valid and arose from the lower authorities' orders.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 36(1)(va)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCHES “B” : HYDERABAD

Before: SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Revenue : Shri S Rajat Mitra For Assessee : Shri Pawan Kumar Chakrapani Date of Hearing : 15-09-2020 Date of Pronouncement : 29-09-2020 O R D E R PER Smt. P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. :

This is revenue’s appeal for the AY.2013-14 against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 2, Hyderabad, dated 01/12/2017. The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are as under: 1) The CIT(A) erred in both facts of the case and in law. 2) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) is correct in law in allowing the finance expenses even though the same was not incurred wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business of the assessee company.

:- 2 -: Head Infotech India Pvt. Ltd., Hyd.

3) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) is correct in law allowing the finance expenses even though there was no commercial expediency. 4) Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the C1T(A) is correct in law in deleting the addition made on account of disallowance u/s 14A on the ground that no exempt income was received during the previous year which is against the CBDT circular No. 05/2014. 5) Any other ground that may urge during the course of appellate proceedings.”

2.

At the time of hearing through Video Conferencing, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the above grounds of appeal raised by the revenue are not emanating either from the AO’s order or from the CIT(A)’s order. The ld. DR also admitted that these grounds are not emanating from the assessment order, as the additions made by the AO were u/s 40(a)(ia) and 36(1)( va) of the Act and no disallowance/addition was made u/s 14A of the Act. In view of the same, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed as not maintainable.

3.

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 29thSeptember, 2020

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →