No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
O R D E R
PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-11, Chennai in 17/CIT(A)-11 dated 30.05.2019 for the Assessment Year 2013-14 against the reduction of the disallowance u/s.14A from Rs.7.39 Crores as made by the Assessing Officer to Rs.39,70,832/- by the learned CIT(A).
Ms. R. Anita, JCIT represented on behalf of the Revenue and Shri Mr. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate represented on behalf of the Assessee.
The learned Departmental Representative supported the order the learned Assessing Officer.
In reply, it was submitted by the learned Authorized Representative that the actual exempt income earned by the assessee was only Rs.1,12,921/-. It was a submission that in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 372 ITR 694 which has also been upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by dismissal of the SLP in the case of ABCAUS reported in 2639 (2018)(11) SC, the disallowance was liable to be restricted to the exempt income. It was however a submission that the assessee has not filed an appeal.
We have considered the rival submission and perused the materials available on record.
As it is noticed, the assessee has not filed an appeal against the confirmation of the disallowance u/s.14A at Rs.39,70,832/- and as the Revenue has not been able to point out any error in the order of the learned CIT(A) in restricting the disallowance u/s.14A to Rs.39,70,832/-, being 0.5% of 3 -: the average value of the investment, the order of the learned CIT(A) on the issue stands confirmed.
In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 4th December, 2019 in Chennai.