M/S SICAGEN INDIA LIMITED,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORP CIRCLE 6(2), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 271/CHNY/2022Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 October 2022AY 2017-183 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that a notional disallowance under Section 14A cannot be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JB, as per High Court decisions. Therefore, the Pr. CIT's order directing re-computation of income under Section 115JB was not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee's assessment order was rectified to grant credit for dividend distribution tax. Subsequently, the Pr. CIT held the order to be erroneous as a disallowance under Section 14A was added to normal income but not to book profits under Section 115JB, leading to excess MAT credit.

What were the issues?

Whether a notional disallowance under Section 14A should be added back while computing book profits under Section 115JB.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 115JB,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee assail the revisional jurisdiction as exercised by learned Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax , Chennai-3 (Pr.CIT) vide order dated 30.03.2022. The order under revision has been passed by Ld. Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) on 18.12.2019 reducing assessed loss to Rs.4.93 Lacs since interest was offered less. This order was rectified on 25.06.2020 at assessee’s request to grant credit of dividend distribution tax.

1.

2 - 2. Subsequently, upon perusal of case records, Ld. Pr. CIT held the order to be erroneous and prejudicial since the disallowance u/s 14A for Rs.69.28 Lacs was added in the normal income. However, the same was not added back while computing the Book Profits u/s 115JB which resulted into excess MAT credit.

3.

The assessee submitted that no expenditure was incurred to earn the exempt income but notional expenditure of 1% of average investments was disallowed. The same was not to be considered while computing Book Profits u/s 115JB as per the decision of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. Bengal Finance & Investment Pvt. Ltd. (ITA 337 of 2013 dated 10.02.2015) as well as the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in Sobha Developers Ltd. vs. DCIT (125 Taxmann.com 72) which held that disallowance u/s 14A is a notional disallowance and therefore, the same could not be added back while computing Book Profits u/s 115JB. However, rejecting the same, Ld. Pr. CIT directed Ld. AO to re-compute the income u/s 115JB. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

4.

Upon perusal of factual matrix, it could be seen that the assessee has made notional disallowance of 1% u/s 14A against tax free income earned by it. Unless it is shown that some expenditure was incurred to earn the exempt income and the same was debited in Profit & Loss Account, the same could not have been added under Clause (f) of Explanation-1 to Sec.115JB. The cited decisions of Hon’ble High Courts duly support this view. Therefore, the impugned order could not be sustained in law. We order so.

5.

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order.

Order pronounced on 17th October, 2022.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →