M/S KARE ELECTRONICS & DEVELOPEMT PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (OSD) RANGE-4(1), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1273/BANG/2018Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore25 April 2019AY 2014-153 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) cannot exceed the actual administrative expenses debited to the Profit & Loss Account. Since the AO and CIT(A) did not provide sufficient details, the matter was remitted back to the AO for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal concerns the disallowance of Rs. 16,17,433/- made by the AO under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii). The assessee argued that the disallowance cannot exceed actual administrative expenses debited to the P&L account. The AO and CIT(A) did not provide details of these expenses.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) can exceed the actual administrative expenses debited to the P&L account, and whether the AO properly computed such expenses.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE

For Appellant: Shri K. R. Pradeep, C. A
For Respondent: Shri D. K. Jha, Addl.CIT (DR)
Hearing: 16.04.2019Pronounced: 25.04.2019

O R D E R Per A. K. GARODIA, A. M.: This appeal is filed by the assessee and the same is directed against the order of ld. CIT (A) – 4, Bangalore dated 22.03.2018 for A. Y. 2014 - 15.

2.

The assessee has raised as many as six grounds of appeal but the grievance is only one i.e. regarding disallowance of Rs. 16,17,433/- made by the AO u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D (2) (iii).

3. Learned AR of the assessee submitted that the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D (2) (iii) cannot exceed the amount of actual expenditure debited by the assessee to the Profit & Loss Account which has a nexus direct or indirect) for earning of exempt income. In support of this submission, he placed reliance on a tribunal order rendered in the case of Vision EL Tech and Services Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT in dated 31.05.2017, copy available on pages 40

Page 2 of 3 to 47 of the paper book. He submitted that Para No. 3.5.1 of this tribunal order is relevant. Learned DR of the revenue supported the order of CIT (A). He also submitted that even those expenses should be considered which have indirect nexus with earning of exempt income.

4.

We have considered the rival submissions. We find that the disallowance made by the AO is @ 0.5% of Average Investment as per Rule 8D (2) (iii) but this is not coming out from the assessment order as to how much is the amount of administrative expenditure debited by the assessee to P & L account. This is a settled law by now that the disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D (2) (iii) cannot exceed the amount of administrative expenses debited to P & L Account because section 14A is for disallowance and not addition. But in the absence of any noting by the AO or CIT (A) as to how much is the amount of administrative expenditure debited by the assessee to P & L account, we cannot quantify the disallowance. Moreover, in the paper book also, the assessee has submitted the balance Sheet but not submitted the Profit & Loss Account. As per the tribunal order cited by the learned AR of the assessee as noted above, it was held that the issue of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D (2) (iii) requires proper examination of the facts on the aspect of identifying the expenditure attributable there under. In that case, the tribunal restored the matter back to AO for examination and computation of administrative Expenditure incurred for earning the exempt income for making the disallowance u/r 8D (2) (iii) and it was clarified that the disallowance u/r 8D (2) (iii) cannot exceed the actual expenditure debited by the assessee to the P & L Account which has a nexus for earning of exempt income. Respectfully following this tribunal order, we remit this issue o the AO for a fresh decision with same direction after providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. We make it clear that the disallowance so made should not exceed the actual expenditure debited by the assessee to the P & L Account which has a nexus (direct or indirect) with earning of exempt income

Page 3 of 3 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →