DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. AKSH OPTIFIBRE LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5261/DEL/2014Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 November 2017AY 2010-114 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that no disallowance under Section 14A can be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income. This decision was based on the binding precedents of the jurisdictional High Court.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed expenses under Section 14A by applying Rule 8D for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The assessee had not earned any exempt income during these years.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A 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(1)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 BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SMT BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Goel, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Hearing: 16.11.2017Pronounced: 17.11.2017

ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: These two appeals filed by the Revenue relate to the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12.

2.

Since common issue is raised in both these appeals, we are proceeding to dispose them off by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience.

3.

Briefly stated, the facts for the assessment year 2010-11 are that the Assessing Officer computed disallowance u/s 14A at Rs.66,59,080/- by applying Rule 8D. The ld. CIT(A) noticed that no exempt income was earned by the assessee during the year. He, therefore, deleted the disallowance. The facts for the assessment year 2011-12 are similar inasmuch as the Assessing Officer computed disallowance for a sum of Rs.76,60,710/- by applying the provisions of Rule 8D. The ld. CIT(A) noted for this year as well that no exempt income was earned by the assessee. He, therefore, deleted the disallowance made.

4.

Having heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record, we find that this issue is no more res integra in view of the judgment of the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del), wherein it has been held that if there is no exempt income, there can be no question of making any disallowance u/s 14A. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. (2014)

90CCH 081-Del-HC. In view of these binding precedents providing for not making any disallowance u/s 14A in the absence of any exempt income, which are squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case, we uphold the view taken by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue.

5.

In the result, both the appeals are dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 17th November, 2017.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →