COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. M/S. TAKE SOLUTIONS LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
TCA/412/2018HC Madras18 August 2022Bench: Hon`ble Mr Justice R. MAHADEVAN4 pages
AI SummaryWithdrawn

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeals as withdrawn. This decision was based on a submission by the Revenue's counsel, referencing Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board of Direct Taxes. This circular stipulates that the Department shall not file or pursue appeals before the High Court if the tax effect does not exceed Rs. 1,00,00,000/-. The Revenue submitted that the tax effect in these appeals was less than this threshold limit. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the appeals as withdrawn, explicitly stating that the substantial questions of law were kept open for determination in appropriate cases. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed. The specific findings of the ITAT on the disallowance under Section 14A were not adjudicated upon by the High Court.

What were the facts?

The Revenue, Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3, Chennai, filed two appeals (T.C.A.Nos. 412 and 413 of 2018) before the High Court of Judicature at Madras. These appeals challenged a common order dated 28.12.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), "A" Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos. 816 and 932/Mds/2016. The appeals pertained to the assessment year 2011-12 and concerned the disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, in relation to investments made by the assessee, M/s. Take Solutions Limited, in its sister concerns and subsidiary companies. The amount in dispute was not explicitly stated but was noted to be below a certain threshold.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide two substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that investments made in sister concern/subsidiary companies are not liable for disallowance under Section 14A, even though the section and Rule 8D do not provide for any exception for such investments. 2. Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that investments in shares of subsidiary companies, which yielded only exempt dividend income, were not subject to Section 14A, while disregarding the decision of the Karnataka High Court in United Breweries Limited vs. DCIT (241 Taxman 299) on an identical issue. The Revenue contended that Section 14A and Rule 8D do not provide for any exception for investments in sister concerns or subsidiaries, and therefore, disallowance should be made. The Revenue also argued that the Tribunal erred in ignoring the Karnataka High Court's decision in United Breweries Limited. The judgment does not record specific arguments from the assessee on these points, but the Tribunal's decision implies the assessee argued that such investments should not attract disallowance under Section 14A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

T.C.A.Nos.412 and 413 of 2018 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS DATED : 18.08.2022 CORAM : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R. MAHADEVAN AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ T.C.A.Nos.412 and 413 of 2018 and CMP.No.9483 of 2018 Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3, Chennai. ... Appellant in both TCAs Versus M/s.Take Solutions Limited, 8B, Old No.18B, Adyar Club gate Road, Chennai 600 028, PAN: AABCT 3684 M ... Respondent in both TCAs Appeals preferred under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the order dated 28.12.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos. 816 and 932/Mds/2016. For Appellant : Mr.M.Swaminathan Senior Standing Counsel M/s.V.Pushpa, Standing Counsel in both TCAs Page 1/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.412 and 413 of 2018

COMMON JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by R.MAHADEVAN, J.) These tax case appeals have been filed by the appellant / Revenue, challenging the common order dated 28.12.2016 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai, in I.T.A.Nos. 816 and 932/Mds/2016, relating to the assessment year 2011-12, by raising the following substantial questions of law: “(i) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that investment made in sister concern/subsidiary companies are not liable for disallowance under Section 14A when the provisions of the said section as well as Rule 8D does not provide for any such exception? (ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in holding that investment in shares of subsidiary companies also yielded only dividend income which is exempt from Income Tax and hence the provisions of section 14A are applicable ignoring the decision of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in United Breweries Limited - Vs- DCIT (241 Taxman 299) of identical issue?" 2. When the matters were taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue brought to the notice of this court the Circular No.17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 issued by the Central Board Direct Page 2/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.412 and 413 of 2018 Taxes, wherein, it is stipulated that appeals shall not be filed/pursued by the Department before the High Court in cases where the tax effect does not exceed Rs.1,00,00,000/- (Rupees One Crore). It is also submitted that the tax effect in these appeals is less than the threshold limit. 3. In the light of the aforesaid submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant / Revenue, the present appeals, wherein, the tax effect is said to be less than the monetary limit imposed, are dismissed as withdrawn, keeping open the substantial questions of law for determination in appropriate cases. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petition is closed. (R.M.D., J.) (M.S.Q., J.) 18.08.2022

Internet : Yes

Index : Yes / No av To 1. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” Bench, Chennai. Page 3/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis T.C.A.Nos.412 and 413 of 2018 R. MAHADEVAN, J. and MOHAMMED SHAFFIQ, J. av 2. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Corporate Circle 3, Chennai.

3.

The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Corporate Circle - 3(1), Chennai. 4. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai. T.C.A.Nos.412 and 413 of 2018 18.08.2022 Page 4/4 https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →