DY CIT 1 (3)(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S UNI DERITEND LTD., MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6899/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 June 2021AY 2010-113 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal agreed with the assessee that the tax effect was below the threshold specified in CBDT Circular No. 17/2019. Consequently, the appeal filed by the Revenue was deemed not maintainable.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The assessee argued that the tax effect was below ₹50 Lakhs, making the appeal not maintainable as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

What were the issues?

Whether the Revenue's appeal is maintainable given the low tax effect, as per CBDT Circular No. 17/2019.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VIRTUAL COURT

Before: SHRI C.N. PRASAD, HON’BLE & SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Parikh
For Respondent: Shri Rajesh K. Yadav
Hearing: 22.06.2021Pronounced: 22.06.2021

O R D E R PER C.N. PRASAD (JM) This appeal is filed by the Revenue against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Mumbai [hereinafter in short “Ld.CIT(A)”] in Appeal No. CIT(A)-3/IT-10357/2017-18 dated 26.08.2019 for the Assessment Year 2010-11.

2.

Revenue has raised the following ground in its appeal: - “1) On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred' in deleting the disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act r.w. Rule 8D(2)(ii) ignoring the fact that the CBDT has issued circular No.

(A.Y: 2010-11) M/s. Uni Deritend Limited. 5 of 2014 dated 11.02.2014, wherein, it was clarified that Rule 8D read with section 14A of the Act provides for disallowance of the expenditure even where tax payer in a particular year has not earned any exempt income. “ 3. At the time of hearing of appeal virtually, Authorized Representative of the assessee submitted that tax effect on the issue in the present appeal is below ₹.50 Lacs and in view of the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019 in F.No.279/Misc.142/2007-ITJ (Pt), the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable.

4.

Departmental Representative also agreed with the above submission of the Authorized Representative of the assessee.

5.

We have heard the submissions and perused the grounds of appeal in this appeal. We find that the tax effect in this appeal is less than ₹.50 Lakhs and therefore the appeal of the Revenue is not maintainable on account of low tax effect in view of the CBDT Circular No. 17/2019 dated 08.08.2019. Hence this appeal is dismissed.

6.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the virtual court on 22.06.2021

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →