ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, KOTA vs. M/S JHALAWAR NAGRIK SAHKARAI BANK LTD., JHALAWAR
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeal was not maintainable as it did not fall under the exceptions provided in the CBDT Circular. The CIT(A) had deleted the disallowance based on High Court decisions, not by holding the circular illegal.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order deleting an addition made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The tax effect of the appeal was below the monetary limit prescribed by CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable before the ITAT given the tax effect and the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM
PER VIJAY PAL RAO, JM :
This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 5th May, 2018
of ld. CIT (A), Kota for the assessment year 2013-14. The revenue has raised the
following grounds :-
“ On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) has erred in :-
(i) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT (A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 2,32,764/- made by the AO u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D.
(ii) The appellant craves liberty to raise additional ground and to modify/amend the ground of appeal at the time of hearing.
2 ITA No. 953/JP/2018 Jhalawar Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd., Jhalawar.
The issue falls under exception as mentioned in para 10(b) of Board’s Circular No. 3/2018 dated 11.07.2018.”
We have heard the ld. D/R as well as the ld. A/R and carefully perused the
impugned order of ld. CIT (Appeals). As apparent from the ground no. 1 of the
revenue’s appeal that the tax effect in this appeal is not exceeding Rs. 20 lacs and,
therefore, the monetary limit provided under CBDT Circular No. 3/2018 dated
11.07.2018 renders the appeal filed by the department not maintainable. The ld.
D/R has submitted that the issue of disallowance made by the AO under section 14A
read with Rule 8D which was deleted by the ld. CIT (Appeals) without following the
Circular No. 5/2014. Hence the case falls in the exception provided in para 10(b) of
the Circular. We note that the ld. CIT (Appeals) has deleted the disallowance made
by the AO on the ground that the assessee has not earned any exempt income and,
therefore, following the various decisions on this issue, no disallowance can be made
under section 14A. Thus it is clear that the ld. CIT (Appeals) has not given the
finding on the issue by holding that the Circular issued by the CBDT is illegal or ultra
virus but the issue has been decided by following the decisions of Hon’ble High
Courts. Hence when no issue is involved in this case where the CBDT circular is
either held illegal or ultra virus, then the case would not fall in the exception under
para 10(b) of the Circular No. 3/2018 as claimed by the revenue. Accordingly when
the tax effect in the appeal of the revenue is below the limit set out by CBDT for the
appeal, the appeal of the assessee is not maintainable in view of CBDT Circular No. 3 of
2018 dated 11.07.2018. Accordingly the appeal of the Department is dismissed as not maintainable.
3 ITA No. 953/JP/2018 Jhalawar Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd., Jhalawar.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order is pronounced in the open court on 12/10/2018.
Sd/- Sd/- (foØe flag ;kno) (fot; iky jkWo ½ (VIKRAM SINGH YADAV ) (VIJAY PAL RAO) U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member
Jaipur Dated:- 12/10/2018. Das/
आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेषित@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू
The Appellant- The ACIT, Circle-1, Kota 2. The Respondent – M/s. Jhalawar Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd., Jhalawar. 3. The CIT(A). 4. The CIT, 5. The DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. Guard File (ITA No. 951/JP/2018) vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@ Aेेपेजंदज. त्महपेजतंत
4 ITA No. 953/JP/2018 Jhalawar Nagrik Sahkari Bank Ltd., Jhalawar.
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 →- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Giri Paints vs. The Assistant Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026
- Rahul Radheshyam Chauhan vs. Union Of INDIA Thru The Sec. Ministry Of Law And Justice And OrsBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- S.Murugesan vs. The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Annai Garden vs. The Commercial Tax Officer / The State Tax OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026