Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. 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
ACIT, Vs. Fortis Hospitals Ltd., Circle-9(2), C/o Escorts Heart Instt. & Res. CR Building, Centre, New Delhi. Okhla Road, New Delhi. PAN: AABCF3718N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.M. Mehta, Advocate Department By : Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 16.11.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 17.11.2017 ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the CIT(A) on 29.06.2015 in relation to the assessment year 2011-12.
The only issue raised in this appeal is against the deletion of addition of Rs.35,16,935/- made by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D.
Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the Assessing Officer made disallowance u/s 14A amounting to Rs.35,16,935/- by applying the provisions of Rule 8D. The ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by observing in para 2.1 of the impugned order that no exempt income was earned by the assessee during the year. The Revenue has come up in appeal before us.
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, the appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 17th November, 2017.