Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
ITA No. 271/Ahd/2017 Global Trading & Investment Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2013-14 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD [Coram: Pramod Kumar, AM and Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM] ITA No. 271/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Global Trading & Investment ............…………......Appellant 101, Akashganga Building, Nr. Gujarat, College Road, Ellisbridge, Ahmedabad-380006 [PAN : AAIFG 3547 L] Vs. Income Tax Officer ...........................Respondent Ward-5(2)(3), Ahmedabad Appearances by: None for the Appellant VK Singh for the Respondent Date of concluding the hearing : 22.06.2018 Date of pronouncing the order : 26.06.2018 O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, AM: 1. By way of this appeal, the assessee appellant has challenged correctness of the order dated 21st November, 2016 passed by the CIT(A), Ahmedabad-5 in the matter of assessment under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for the assessment year 2013-14. Grievances raised by the assessee are as follows:
“1. The Id CIT Appeal erred in upholding the order of the A.O. in making the disallowance of Rs.5,22,140/- u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D without appreciating the fact that the assessee has directly incurred the expenditure of Rs. 2,476/- during this year for earning exempt income and the same has been disallowed while filing the tax return and that the investments in shares were made out of own funds and not out of borrowed funds and hence disallowance U/S.14A r.w. Rule 8D may be deleted and the order of the Id CIT Appeal and Id A.O. be reversed.
The Id CIT Appeal erred in upholding the order of the A.O. and failed to appreciate that dividend income is directly credited to Bank Account and appellant does not have to incur any expenditure for earning exempt income and hence disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D may be deleted and the order of the Id CIT Appeal and Id A.O. be reversed.
The Id CIT Appeal erred in concluding that the learned A.O. has recorded the satisfaction regarding the accounts of the assessee which in fact such satisfaction has not been recorded and only journal comment/observation has been made and the Id A.O. has mechanically invoked Sec 14A r.w. rule 8D
ITA No. 271/Ahd/2017 Global Trading & Investment Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2013-14 Page 2 of 2 and without appreciating the fact that the assessee has already made the disallowance while filing the tax return and the learned CIT and Id A.O. did not reject the same and still the learned CIT uphold the order of the Id A.O. who heavily relied on the Circular issued by the honorable CBDT and the order of the Id CIT Appeal and Id A.O. be reversed.
The learned CIT (A) erred in upholding the order of the A.O. that the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D cannot exceed exempt income the Id CIT Appeal and Id A.O. be reversed.
The learned CIT(A) erred in not passing the order and not making specific observation of ground of appeal no.5 that the dividend received during this year is only Rs.508/- and hence the disallowance may be restricted to maximum Rs.508/-. The order of the Id CIT Appeal and Id A.O. be reversed.
The learned CIT (A) erred in upholding the order of the A.O. that on facts and in law for charging of interest u/s 234B of the Act when no such interest is leviable. The appellant denies its liability to pay interest. The Id CIT Appeal and Id A.O. be reversed.” 2. When this appeal was called out for hearing, it has been noticed that the entire dividend income during the year was Rs. 508/-; whereas the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer u/s 14A, as sustained by the learned CIT(A), is Rs.5,22,140/-. Learned Departmental Representative fairly accepts that by now the legal position is well settled by series of orders of this Tribunal, including in the case of Tata Industries Limited vs. ITO, [2016] 181 TTJ 600 (Mumbai - Trib.), that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income in respect of which the disallowance has been so invoked. In this view of the matter and following the legal position so settled, we deem it fit and proper to restrict the disallowance to Rs.508/-. We order accordingly. 3. In the result, appeal is allowed. Pronounced in the open court today on the 26th June, 2018
Sd/- Sd/-
Ms. Madhumita Roy Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 26th day of June, 2018 **bt Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad