DCIT, CIRCLE -25(1), NEW DELHI vs. TECHNO TREXIM (INDIA) PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s deletion of the disallowance. It noted that the Delhi High Court, in a recent decision, held that amendments to Section 14A clarifying its application even without exempt income were prospective.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed the deletion of disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D by the CIT(A). The assessee argued that no exempt income was received, and the CIT(A) followed the Delhi High Court's decision in Cheminvest Limited.
What were the issues?
Whether disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D is applicable when no exempt income is earned, and if amendments to Section 14A are retrospective.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT1,569 citing378 ITR 33 · 2015 · HC · Read judgment
- Sedco Forex International Drill. Inc. v. CIT285 citing12 SCC 717 · 2005 · SC · Read judgment
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “H” NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI [Dr.] B.R.R. KUMAR
आदेश / O R D E R PER C. N. PRASAD, J.M.
1, This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, New Delhi [hereinafter 1
I.T.A.No.5889/Del/2019 referred to CIT (Appeals)] dated 11.04.2019 in deleting the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Act for the Assessment Year 2015-16.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submits that during the assessment year the assessee did not receive any exempt income and the ld. CIT (Appeals) deleted the disallowance. Following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited Vs. CIT (378 ITR 33). The ld. Counsel further submits that in a recent decision, the jurisdictional High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Eros Infrastructure (India) Ltd. In ITA. 204/Del/2022 dated 20.07.2022 held that the Amendment brought in by the Finance Act, 2022 to the provisions of section 14A of the Act clarifying even if there is no exempt income the provisions of section 14A read with Rule 8D have application was held to be applicable only prospectively.
The ld. DR supported the order of the Assessing Officer.
Heard rival submissions perused the orders of the authorities below. We observe that the ld. CIT (Appeals) deleted the disallowance made under section 14A of the Act for the reason that the assessee did not receive any exempt income during the assessment year under consideration. The ld. CIT (Appeals) followed the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited Vs. CIT (supra). We further observe that recently the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs. Eros Infrastructure (India) Ltd. (supra) and the Hon’ble Delhi High Court following the decision of apex court in the case of Sedco Forex International Drill. Inc Vs. CIT (2005) 12 SCC 717 and the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M.M. Aqua Technologies Ltd. Vs. CIT in Civil Appeal Nos. 4742 and 4743 of 2021 (dated 11.08.2021) held that the Amendment to section 14A of the Act w/o for removal of 2
I.T.A.No.5889/Del/2019 doubts cannot be presumed to be retrospective. Thus, we do not see any infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT (Appeals) in deleting the disallowance made under section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Act. Grounds raised by the Revenue are rejected.
In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on : 05/09/2022
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Santa Singh vs. SuperintendentUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Azaad Builders vs. Assistant Commissioner SGSTUttarakhand · 27 Oct 2026
- Shadab Malik vs. State Of U.P. And 2 OthersAllahabad · 26 Oct 2026
- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026