Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : F : NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SMT BEENA PILLAI
ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: These two appeals filed by the Revenue relate to the assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12.
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.
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.
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.
In the result, both the appeals are dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17th November, 2017.