ANJANEYA COLD STORAGE PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 1(1)(1), MUMBAI

: Shri Apurva R. Shah- Ld.AR अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri S. Michael Jerald - Ld. DR ""यथ"क"ओरसे/Respondent by सुनवाई क" तार"ख/ : 19/12/2019 Date of Hearing घोषणा क" तार"ख / : 19/12/2019 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member): - 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2014-15 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Mumbai [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No.CIT(A)- 2 M/s. Anjaneya Cold Storage Private Limited Assessment Year-2014-15 2/IT-10255/2017-18 Order dated 18/09/2018 on following sole ground of appeal: - The Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-2, Mumbai erred In not adjudicating that no disallowance u/s. 14A ought to be done on those investments that have not yielded any income during the year.

As evident from grounds of appeal

, the sole issue involved in the appeal is disallowance u/s14A.

2. The Ld. Authorized Representative for Assessee (AR), at the outset, relying upon the order of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2013- 14, common order dated 01/03/2019, pleaded that no disallowance should be made against those investments which did not yield any exempt income during the year. The copy of the order has been placed on record. The Ld. DR submitted that the disallowance was to be computed on all investments irrespective of the fact whether the same yielded any exempt income or not. We have duly considered the rival submissions and the cited order of Tribunal in assessee’s own case.

3. Facts on record would reveal that the assessee being resident corporate assessee was assessed for year under consideration u/s 143(3) on 24/11/2017 wherein the assessee was saddled with disallowance u/s 14A for Rs.13.45 Lacs in view of the fact that it earned exempt dividend income of Rs.9.93 Lacs. Against the same, the assessee had offered suo- moto disallowance of Rs.2,654/- in its computation of income. However, not satisfied with assessee’s working, Ld.AO, invoking Rule 8D, computed expense disallowance u/r 8D(2)(iii) for Rs.13.47 Lacs, being 0.5% of 3 M/s. Anjaneya Cold Storage Private Limited Assessment Year-2014-15 average investments held by the assessee during the year. After adjusting suo-moto disallowance offered by the assessee, net disallowance thus worked out to be Rs.13.45 Lacs which was added to the income of the assessee. Upon further appeal, Ld. first appellate authority, directed Ld. AO restrict the disallowance to the extent of Rs.9.93 Lacs i.e. exempt income earned by the assessee during the year. Still aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us.

4. Upon due consideration, we find that the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AY 2013-14, has directed Ld. AO to compute disallowance vis-à-vis only those investments which yielded exempt income during the year. Reliance was placed the decision of Delhi Tribunal (Special Bench) rendered in ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd. [82 Taxmann.com 415] for the said conclusions. Facts being pari-materia the same, respectfully following the same, we issue similar directions to Ld.AO.

5. The appeal stands allowed in terms of our above order.

Order pronounced in the open court on 19th December,2019. /- (Vikas Awasthy) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) "ाियक सद" / Judicial Member लेखा सद" / Accountant Member