PARADIP PORT AUTHORITY,JAGATSINGHPUR vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged additions made by the AO and confirmed by the CIT(A) regarding disallowance of expenses under Section 14A, CSR expenses, and provisions for salary, wages, and provident fund. The assessee argued that its status as a statutory authority under the Major Port Trust Act exempts it from certain provisions applicable to companies.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that disallowance under Section 14A should be restricted to investments yielding exempt income. It also ruled that CSR expenses are allowable for the assessee as it is not registered under the Companies Act. Finally, it allowed provisions for salary, wages, and provident fund, stating they are ascertained liabilities under an approved accrual accounting framework.
What were the issues?
Whether disallowance under Section 14A should be on all investments or only those yielding exempt income, and whether CSR expenses and provisions for salary, wages, and PF are allowable for a statutory port authority.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “DB” BENCH: CUTTACK
Before: Shri George Mathan&Shri Rajesh Kumar]
Per Rajesh Kumar, AM: This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the “Ld. CIT(A)”] dated 13.10.2025 for the AY 2023-24. 2. Issue raised in ground no. 1 is against the confirmation of addition of Rs. 4,76,36,626/- by the Ld. CIT(A) as made by the AO u/s 14A of the Act on account of expenses relating to earning of exempt income.
2 Assessment Year: 2023-24 Paradip Port Authority
Facts in brief are that during the course of ass
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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 →- Jitin Batra Proprietor Of M/S. Dreamz Conference And Event Management Group vs. Sales Tax Officer Class Ii / Avato Ward 60 & Ors.Delhi · 7 Oct 2026
- Madhusudan Saraogi vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Revenue, Howrah And Kadamtala Charge And Ors.Calcutta · 7 Oct 2026
- Neeraj Massey vs. Assistant CommissionerUttarakhand · 7 Oct 2026
- Padu Paraja vs. The Commnr. Of CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 7 Oct 2026
- The Lead Factory vs. The Assistant Commissoner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 7 Oct 2026