SCAN HOLDINGS PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-22(2), NEW DELHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal deleted the disallowance under Section 14A as it was made without jurisdiction in a limited scrutiny case. The disallowance of car running expenses was also deleted as the revenue failed to prove the personal nature of the expenses.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order. The appeal involved disallowance under Section 14A and disallowance of car running and entertainment expenses.
What were the issues?
Whether disallowance under Section 14A is permissible in a limited scrutiny case without conversion to full scrutiny. Whether car running expenses can be disallowed on an ad-hoc basis without proving personal nature.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘G’, NEW DELHI
Before: Ms. Suchitra KambleDr. B. R. R. Kumar
Per Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member:
The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-8, New Delhi dated 18.06.2019.
Regarding the disallowance u/s 14A, the assessee at the outset argued that this is not a parameter to be examined in the case of limited scrutiny pertaining to the assessee as per the notice issued dated 18.07.2017. There was no proof on record that the limited scrutiny case has been converted into full scrutiny on obtaining the approval of the ld. PCIT as per the instant instructions issued by the CBDT.
2 Scan Holdings Pvt. Ltd. 3. Since, the disallowance u/s 14A determined by the ld. CIT (A) of Rs.68,137/- is without jurisdiction mandated, we hereby delete the addition made by the AO.
With regard to the disallowance on account of car running expenses and entertainment expenses (additional grounds). The ld. AR argued that there cannot be any expenses of personal element in case of the company. He argued that the disallowance of expenses of Rs.1,53,051/- on account of car running and Rs.24,657/- on account of entertainment expenses cannot be treated as personal expenses. Regarding the entertainment expenses being a factual issue of disallowance of Rs.24,657/- forgone by the assessee earlier, owing to any valid reasons, we decline to admit this ground at this juncture.
Having gone through the record, we find that revenue has not brought anything to prove the personal nature of the expenses with regard to car maintenance expenses except disallowing the same on adhoc basis. Hence, the action of the revenue cannot be supported. In the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the appeal of the assessee on this ground is allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed. Order Pronounced in the Open Court on 18/02/2021.
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 →- Sureshchandra Moolchand Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026