DCIT, KARNAL vs. M/S. MAHESH TIMBER PVT. LTD., KARNAL

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1514/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 July 2019AY 2012-135 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that since the assessee did not earn any exempt income, no disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D can be made. This is a well-settled position of law.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer made a disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The CIT(A) restricted this disallowance. The assessee had not earned any exempt income during the assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D is permissible when no exempt income has been earned by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(2)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, DELHI ‘E’ BENCH,

Before: SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, & MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Goel, CA
For Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr. DR
Hearing: 03.07.2019Pronounced: 04.07.2019

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA No. 1514/DEL/2017
CO No. 119/DEL/2017

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER,

1.

The above two captioned appeal by the revenue and cross objection by the assessee are preferred against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals], Karnal dated 23.12.2015 pertaining to assessment year 2012-13.

2.

The underlying facts in the solitary grievance of the Revenue and Ground No. 2 of the cross objection are same and therefore, they are being disposed off together.

3.

The bone of contention is the disallowance made u/s 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short] read with Rule 8D of the Income tax Rules, 1962. The Assessing Officer has disallowed Rs. 73,46,890/-, which has been restricted to Rs. 1,18,499/- by the ld. CIT(A).

4.

The undisputed fact is that during the year under consideration, the assessee has not earned any exempt income from its investments. This fact has been accepted by the authorities below. Since during the subject assessment year there is no exempt income earned by the assessee, there cannot be any disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r 8D. This issue is by now well settled in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Cheminvest Ltd 121 ITD 318 which was affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Same view is taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd 372 ITR 97. In view of the above, disallowance of Rs. 73,46,890/- is directed to be deleted. Accordingly, the Ground raised by the revenue is dismissed whereas Ground No. 2 of the assessee in the cross objection is allowed.

5.

All the other issues raised in the cross objection do not arise from the order of the first appellate authority and are, accordingly, dismissed.

6.

In the result, the appeal of the revenue in CO No. 119/DEL/20174 is partly allowed.

The order is pronounced in the open court on 04.07.2019.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →