DCIT, CIR.-4(1), KOLKATA vs. M/S ASHARAM LEASING AND FINANCE (P) LTD, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 15/KOL/2021Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 December 2021AY 2015-163 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 held that Section 14A cannot be invoked if the assessee has not earned any exempt income. This decision was based on various High Court judgments supporting this proposition.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of disallowance made under Section 14A by the Assessing Officer. The assessee did not appear for the hearing, but the Revenue's appeal was filed with a delay of 42 days.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A is attracted when no exempt income has been earned by the assessee. Whether the Revenue's appeal, filed with a delay, should be admitted.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, “B”

Before: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumar

order

: December 09, 2021 Hearing through Video Conferencing ORDER

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

1.

The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order dated 03.09.2019 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-2, Kolkata [hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’] passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act’). The Revenue in this appeal has taken the following grounds of appeal: “1. For the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and in facts in deleting the disallowance u/s 14A of Rs.3,50,07,137/- without considering the facts of the case.

2. That the appellant craves leave to add to and/or alter, amend, modify or rescind the grounds hereinabove before of hearing of this appeal.” No one has put in appearance on behalf of the assessee despite notice. Therefore, 2. we proceed to adjudicate the present appeal after hearing the ld. DR.

3.

At the outset, it is noticed that the appeal filed by the Revenue is time-barred by 42 days. A separate application for condonation of the said delay has been filed, wherein reasons for the delay in filing this appeal have been mentioned. Considering the above reasons, we condone the delay.

Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/s Asharam Leasing And Finance (P) Ltd 4. The only issue in this appeal raised by the Revenue is against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer in respect of notional expenses incurred on earning of tax exempt income u/s 14A of the Act.

5.

A perusal of the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) reveals that the CIT(A) has deleted the addition so made by the Assessing Officer observing that section 14A cannot be invoked where no exempt income was earned by the assessee during the year. The LD. CIT(A) in this respect has relied upon various decisions of the Hon’ble High Courts of the country.

6.

We find that the issue is now squarely covered by the various decisions of the High Courts in favour of the assessee viz. CIT, Faridabad vs. Lakhani Marketing Inc.’ 226 Taxman 45 (P&H) , ‘CIT vs. Winsome Textiles (2009) 319 ITR 33(DelhI, Corrtech Energy P Ltd. (2014) 45 Taxman.com 116 (Gujarat High Court), CIT vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR (All) 277 including the decision of coordinate bench in the case of REI Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol) as upheld in Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in G. A. No. 3581 of 2013. In all the above referred to case laws, the Hon’ble High Courts have been unanimous to hold that no disallowance is attracted u/s 14A of the Act in case the assessee has not earned any income not forming part of the total income.

The Ld. DR could not point out any decision contrary to the above settled proposition of law. In view of this, there is no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and the same is accordingly dismissed.

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed. 7.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →