TABLEZ FOOD COMPANY PRIVATE LIMITED,KOCHI vs. CORPORATE CIR 2(1), KOCHI
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that in the absence of any exempt income, no disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act can be made. Following established legal precedents, the Tribunal concluded that the AO was not justified in making the disallowance.
What were the facts?
The appellant, Tablez Food Company Pvt. Ltd., a restaurant business, filed its ITR for AY 2016-17 declaring a loss. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3) and disallowed Rs. 1,51,800/- under Section 14A of the Act. The CIT(A) confirmed the AO's action, leading the appellant to file an appeal before the Tribunal.
What were the issues?
Whether disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act is justified even in the absence of any exempt income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(2)Show listHide 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.
- Pr. CIT v. Novell Software Development India (P.) Ltd.18 citing434 ITR 154 · 2021 · HC
- Road Development Company Ltd (2021) 435 ITR 323 (Mad.) (2) Tamil Nadu Development Co Ltd. v. DCIT4 citing436 ITR 298 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH
Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM
Assessment Year: 2016-17 Tablez Food Company Pvt. Ltd. .......... Appellant 971/B Y Tower, MKK Nair Road Vazhakkala, Kochi 682030 [PAN: AADCT6643G] vs. ITO, Corporate Ward -2(4), Kochi .......... Respondent Assessee by: ------- None ------- Revenue by: Ms. Neethu S. Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 27.11.2025 Date of Pronouncement: 28.11.2025 O R D E R This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Panaji [CIT(A)] dated 29.08.2025 for Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17.
Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is a private limited company engaged in the business of running of restaurants. The appellant filed the return of income for AY 2016-17 on 15.10.2016 declaring loss of Rs. 3,30,247/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Income Tax Officer, Corporate Ward – 2(4), Kochi (hereinafter called "the AO") vide order dated Tablez Food Company Pvt. Ltd. 11.12.2018 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) at a loss of Rs,. 1,26,000/-. While doing so, the AO made disallowed Rs. 1,51,800/- u/s. 14A of the Act.
Being aggrieved, an appeal was filed before the CIT(A), who vide the impugned order confirmed the action of the AO.
Being aggrieved, the appellant is in appeal before this Tribunal in the present appeal.
I heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The issue that arises for my consideration is whether the CIT(A) was justified in confirming the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act even in the absence of any exempt income. Now, it is a settled position of law that in the absence of exempt income, no disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act can be made. Reliance in this regard is placed on the following judgments:
(1) CIT vs. Tamilnadu Road Development Company Ltd (2021) 435 ITR 323 (Mad.) (2) Tamil Nadu Development Co Ltd vs. DCIT, 436 ITR 298 (3) PCIT vs. Nam Estates P Ltd, 434 ITR 154 7. Respectfully following the ratio of the above decisions, we hold that the AO was not justified in making the disallowance u/s. 14A in the absence of exempt income.
Order pronounced in the open court on 28th November, 2025. 6.
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Dillip Kumar Behera vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, Mayurbhanj CircleOrissa · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl.Dev Construction vs. The Proper OfficerMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Abbal Dass Arya vs. Commissioner State Goods And Services Tax CommissionerUttarakhand · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Darbesh Medical Enterprise vs. State Of West Bengal And Ors.Calcutta · 15 Oct 2026
- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary Dept. Of Revenue Ministry Of Finance And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026