M. PRATAPRAY PRINTS PRIVATE LIMITED,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ACIT, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the CIT(A)'s order was ex-parte and issues were not properly examined. The Tribunal condoned the delay of 125 days in filing the appeal and set aside the CIT(A)'s order for de novo adjudication.
What were the facts?
The assessee company filed its return declaring income of ₹12,01,91,670/-. The case was selected for limited scrutiny regarding disallowance of expenditure under section 14A. The Assessing Officer observed substantial investments and exempt dividend income, debiting interest expenditure without disallowance under section 14A. The AO computed a disallowance of ₹20,81,138/-.
What were the issues?
Whether the disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D was correctly computed and upheld by the lower authorities, especially when the order of the CIT(A) was ex-parte.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(3)Show listHide 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.
- Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji3,926 citing167 ITR 471 · 1987 · SC
- Balakrishnan v. M. Krishnamurthy368 citing7 SCC 123 · 1998 · SC
- Vedabhai v. Santaram262 citing253 ITR 798 · 2002 · SC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL & SHRI NARENDRA PRASAD SINHA
PER SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL - JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal has been filed by the Assessee against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), ADDL/JCIT(A)-1, Lucknow vide order dated 09.08.2024 passed for A.Y. 2017-18. 2. The assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:
“1. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is against law, equity & justice.
The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and facts in upholding the disallowance made u/s 14A of the Act of Rs. 20,18,138/- by the Ld. A.O.
The appellant Craves liberty to add, amend, alter or modify all or an
The order continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
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. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026
- Rohan Tanna vs. Directorate General Of Goods And Services Tax IntelligenceChhattisgarh · 14 Oct 2026
- Dipak Saikia vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Saraswati Phukan vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Sanjay Maheshwari vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 14 Oct 2026
