M/S ABIL INFRAPROJECTS P. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CENTRAL CIR.- 2(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1895/MUM/2020Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 October 2021AY 2013-143 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 investments yielding no exempt income, such as the partnership firm in this case which resulted in a loss, should be excluded when computing disallowance under Section 14A. Therefore, the additional disallowance made by the AO was not sustainable.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a real estate developer, earned exempt income and offered a suo-moto disallowance under Section 14A. The Assessing Officer (AO) made an additional disallowance by applying Rule 8D, including investments in partnership firms which yielded a loss.

What were the issues?

Whether investments yielding no exempt income should be included in the computation of disallowance under Section 14A.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala – Ld. AR
For Respondent: Shri Brajendra Kumar – Ld. Sr. DR

O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of order of learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)- 48, Mumbai [CIT(A)], dated 07/07/2020 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer (AO) u/s 153A r.w.s. 143(3) on 25/05/2019. The only grievance of the assessee is disallowance u/s 14A.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →