ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, KOTA vs. SHRI AJAY KUMAR JAIN, KOTA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the appeal of the Revenue was not maintainable as the tax effect was below the prescribed limit in CBDT Circular No. 3/2018. The issue did not fall under the exceptions mentioned in the circular.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition of Rs. 48,727/- made under Section 14A by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) had deleted this addition, finding that the assessee's own interest-free funds were sufficient for the investments made.
What were the issues?
Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the tax effect and the applicability of CBDT Circular No. 3/2018, and whether the deletion of disallowance under Section 14A by the CIT(A) was justified.
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 vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 792/JP/2018
आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jko] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 792/JP/2018 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13 cuke The ACIT, Shri Ajay Kumar Jain Vs. Circle-1, 277, Shopping Centre, Kota. Kota. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANPJ 1861 B vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : None jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenue by : Shri J. C. Kulhari (J.CIT) lquokbZ dh rkjh[k@ Date of Hearing : 27/07/2018 mn?kks"k.kk dh rkjh[k@Date of Pronouncement: 30/07/2018 vkns'k@ ORDER
PER: VIJAY PAL RAO, J.M. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 08.03.2018 of CIT(A), Kota for the assessment year 2012-13. The Revenue has raised the following ground as under:-
“ 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 CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 48,727/- made by the AO u/s 14A R.W. Rule 8D.
ITA No. 792/JP/2018 ACIT vs. Shri Ajay Kumar Jain
(ii) the appellant craves liberty to raise additional ground and to modify/amend the ground of appeal at the time of hearing.”
None has appeared on behalf of the assessee-respondent this
appeal was called for hearing. The only grievance of the Revenue is
against the addition of Rs. 48,727/- made U/s 14A of the Act deleted
by the ld. CIT(A). Undisputedly tax effect in this appeal of the Revenue
is not exceeding Rs. 20 lacs whereas as per the Circular No. 3/2018
dated 11.07.2018 of CBDT the Department shall withdraw all the
appeals having tax effect not exceeding Rs. 20 lacs pending before the
Tribunal. The ld. DR has submitted that as it is apparent from the
grounds of appeal the issue falls in the exception under para 10(b) of
Circular No. 3/2018.
We find that the AO made disallowance of Rs. 48,727/- U/s 14A
which was deleted by the ld. CIT(A) by recording the fact that the
assessee’s own interest free fund was more than sufficient for the
investment in question and therefore, the disallowance made by the
AO on account of interest expenditure is not called for. At the outset
we note that the CIT(A) has deleted the disallowance made by the AO
by giving a finding of fact that no expenditure was incurred by the
assessee for earning exempt income. Further, as per Clause (b) of para 2
ITA No. 792/JP/2018 ACIT vs. Shri Ajay Kumar Jain 10 of Circular No. 3/2018 the issue which involves the Board order,
notices, instruction and Circular which has been held to be illegal or
ultra vires are required to be contested on merits even if the tax effect
is less than mandatory limit prescribed in these circular. The issue of
disallowance made U/s 14A does not involve the question of holding
any Board order, notices, instruction and Circular as illegal or ultra
vires. Accordingly, this issue does not fall in the exception as claimed
by the Department. Hence, when the tax effect in this appeal of the
Revenue is not exceeding the limits provided in the Circular No. 3/2018
the same is not maintainable. Accordingly the appeal of the Revenue is
dismissed.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30/07/2018.
Sd/- Sd/- ¼fot; iky jko½ ¼foØe flag ;kno½ (Vikram Singh Yadav) (Vijay Pal Rao) ys[kk lnL;@Accountant Member U;kf;d lnL;@Judicial Member Tk;iqj@Jaipur fnukad@Dated:- 30/07/2017. *Santosh. आदेश की प्रतिलिपि अग्रेf’ात@ब्वचल वf जीम वतकमत वितूंतकमक जवरू 1. vihykFkhZ@The Appellant- The ACIT, Circle-1, Kota. 2. izR;FkhZ@ The Respondent- Shri Ajay Kumar Jain, Kota. 3. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT 3
ITA No. 792/JP/2018 ACIT vs. Shri Ajay Kumar Jain 4. vk;dj vk;qDr@ CIT(A) 5. विभागीय प्रतिनिधि] आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर@क्त्ए प्ज्Aज्ए Jंपचनत. 6. xkMZ QkbZy@ Guard File {ITA No. 792/JP/2018} vkns'kkuqlkj@ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार@Aेेज. त्महपेजतंत
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 →- Prabhudatta Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of Commercial Taxes And Goods And Services Tax, OdishaOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Rajesh Kumar Gupta vs. Joint Commissioner Of GST (Appeal), Territorial Range, BolangirOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Attitude Exim PVT. LTD., Rourkela vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S.Pradeep Kumar Mahapatra, Bhubaneswar vs. Superintendent Bhubaneswar-Iii Circle, CGST Range, BhubaneswarOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026