PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1 vs. M/S ADANI PROPERTIES PVT LTD

PDF · subscribers

TAXAP/344/2020HC GujaratGJHC24049679202011 January 2021Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA2 pages

AI SummaryRemanded

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court disposed of the Tax Appeal in terms of its earlier order passed in the case of the very same assessee, dated October 12, 2020, in Tax Appeal No. 224 of 2020. The clarification made in paragraph 10 of that earlier order was also made applicable to the present Tax Appeal. The specific reasoning or findings of the Tribunal on the issue of disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, or the CIT(A)'s order, are not detailed in this judgment. The operative direction is to follow the precedent set in the related appeal. No specific issue was left undecided; rather, the appeal was decided based on a prior ruling.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, has filed a Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), 'B' Bench, Ahmedabad, dated January 6, 2020. This order pertains to Assessment Year 2013-14 and relates to ITA No. 2806/Ahd/2017. The appeal challenges the ITAT's decision to set aside the order of the CIT(A), which had confirmed an addition of Rs. 1,38,04,106 out of Rs. 23,29,20,266. This addition was made on account of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in setting aside the decision of the CIT(A) confirming an addition of Rs. 1,38,04,106 out of Rs. 23,29,20,266 made on account of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D? Assessee's Contentions: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee, M/s Adani Properties Pvt Ltd. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue contends that the Appellate Tribunal erred in law and facts by setting aside the CIT(A)'s decision, which had confirmed the addition made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Revenue's argument hinges on the correctness of the addition made by the lower authorities.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260A,Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances

C/TAXAP/344/2020 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 344 of 2020 ========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1 Versus M/S ADANI PROPERTIES PVT LTD ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA and HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ILESH J. VORA Date : 11/01/2021

ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.PARDIWALA) 1 This Tax Appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act, 1961') is at the instance of the Revenue and is directed against the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Ahmedabad, dated 6th January 2020 in the ITA No.2806/Ahd/2017 for the A.Y. 201314. 2 The Revenue has proposed the following solitary question of law for the consideration of this Court: “Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in setting aside the decision of CIT(A) confirming addition to the extent of Rs.1,38,04,106 out of Rs.23,29,20,266/ made on account of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act r.w. Rule 8D?” C/TAXAP/344/2020 ORDER 3 This Tax Appeal is disposed of in terms of the order passed by this Court in the case of the very same assessee dated 12th October 2020 in Tax Appeal No.224 of 2020. The clarification, as made in para 10 of the order passed in the Tax Appeal No.224 of 2020, shall also be made applicable to the present Tax Appeal. (J. B. PARDIWALA, J) (ILESH J. VORA,J) CHANDRESH

More judgments on Section 14A

Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad
ITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), Mumbai
ITA 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, Mumbai
ITA 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, Mumbai
ITA 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), Mumbai
ITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →