ANGLO COMMOTRADE PVT. LTD.,HOWRAH vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 1(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal remanded the matter to the AO for verification of disallowance under Section 14A and write-off of sundry balances, citing violation of natural justice. It also held that disallowance under Section 14A cannot be added to book profit under Section 115JB.
What were the facts?
The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order concerning disallowance under Section 14A and write-off of sundry balances. The assessee claimed no exempt income was earned and argued for a de novo adjudication by the AO.
What were the issues?
Whether disallowance under Section 14A is permissible without exempt income and whether it can be added to book profit under Section 115JB.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “D”, KOLKATA
ORDER
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal filed by the assessee against the order dated 30.11.2017 passed by CIT(A)-1, Kolkata for AY 2012-13 u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “Act”).
Ground No.1 is relating to confirmation of disallowance made on account of expenses under section 14A for the purpose of earning exempt income in the facts and circumstances of the case. We find no finding whatsoever given by the CIT(A) as there is no representation on behalf of the assessee in the first appellate proceedings. Ld.AR prayed to remand the matter to the file of AO instead of CIT(A) for denovo adjudication. He submits that there was no exempt income earned by the assessee during this year and hence no disallowance can be made u/s 14A of the Act by placing reliance in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. of Hon’ble Supreme
(ASSESSMENT YEAR-2012-13) Court in para 40. Ld. DR did not report any objection and in view of the same, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of AO for its verification in respect of examining the accounts of the assessee in computing the disallowance u/s 14A with respect to earning of exempt income. In any event, the disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income earned as held by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in the case of CIT vs Ashika Global Securities Ltd. ITAT 100/2014 [G.A.2122/2014] order dated 11.06.2018. Thus, Ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Ground No.2 is relating to confirmation of disallowance made on account of sundry balances written off in the Profit & Loss A/c in the facts and circumstances of the case. It is noted from the assessment order in para 2 that the assessee could not produce any details in respect of sundry balances which were written off in the P&L A/c. It was pleaded before us that no proper opportunity was given. Therefore, we deem it proper to remand the matter to the file of AO for its verification on the ground of violation of principles of natural justice and the assessee is liberty to file all evidences, if any in support of its claim. Thus, Ground No.2 raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Ground No.3 is relating to confirmation of the addition made on account of expenditure incurred u/s 14A of the Act while computing the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. It is noted from the record that the total income of the assessee was assessed under the normal provisions of the Act wherein the AO added disallowance to expenditure u/s 14A of the Act. Again, the said expenditure was added to the book profit computed u/s 115JB of the Act. In view of the judgement of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. where no such adjustment of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is permissible while
(ASSESSMENT YEAR-2012-13) computed book profit u/s 115JB of the Act. Hence, Ground No.3 raised by the assessee is allowed.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 13.02.2019.
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- K Madhusudan Reddy vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 28 Oct 2026
- Sandeep Ranjan Rout vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Gagan Bihari Rout@Gagan Rout vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Biswanath Rana vs. The Commissioner, CT And GST, Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 28 Oct 2026
- Sushama Mishra vs. The Commissioner Of CT And GST, Odisha, KatakOrissa · 28 Oct 2026