ACIT CIR 6(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. JSM CORPORATION P. LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6923/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 July 2018AY 2010-1112 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 upheld the deletion of additions for bogus purchases and disallowance of expenses, finding no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s orders. The disallowance under Section 14A was also deleted as the assessee earned no tax-free income.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of additions made for bogus purchases, disallowance of expenses, and disallowance under Section 14A. The assessee did not appear for the hearings.

What were the issues?

Whether additions for bogus purchases and disallowance of expenses were justified, and if Section 14A was applicable when no tax-free income was earned.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69C,Section 14A,Section 40(a)(ia),Section 194H

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, MUMBAI BENCHES “J”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri N.K. Pradhan

For Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari-DR
Hearing: 05/07/2018

finding in the impugned order that the assessee did not earn any tax free income during previous year, thus, we are in agreement with the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) that in view of this factual matrix section 14A cannot be invoked. Our view find support from the decision in the case of Lakhani Marketing Inc.(49 taxman.com 257)(P & H) and Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd. (55 taxman.com 262)(Allahabad). We

9 M/s JSM Corporation P. Ltd. to 6925/Mum/2016 find no infirmity in the conclusion of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), thus, this ground is dismissed.

5.

Next ground pertains to disallowance of Rs.1,10,56,879/- made under section 40(a)(ia) r.w.s. 194H of the Act on account of credit card expenses. The crux of arguments on behalf of the Revenue is that the order of the Tribunal in Jet Airways India Ltd., relied upon by Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), has not been accepted by the Department and the appeal has been filed before the Hon'ble High Court.

5.1. We have considered the submissions of Ld. DR and perused the material available on record. We find that this ground has been dealt with in para -7 onwards of the order along with the remarks made by the Ld. Assessing Officer.

The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) considered the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Jet Airways (India) Ltd. (ITA NO.7439, 7440 & 7441/Mum/2010) order dated 17/07/2013 and held that TDS is not required to be deducted on credit card discount as it was a fee retained by the 10 M/s JSM Corporation P. Ltd. to 6925/Mum/2016 bank/credit card company. We find no infirmity in the order, therefore, it is upheld.

6.

The next ground pertains to deleting the disallowance of Rs.2,14,08,225/- under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of rent expenses. Considering the factual matrix and following the decision of the Tribunal in the case of Three Star Granite Pvt. Ltd. (49 taxman.com 578) (Coachin), wherein, it was held that short deduction of tax cannot be the reasons for disallowance under section 40(a)(ia) of the Act and thus the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), deleted the addition. It was found by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) that even the Ld. Assessing Officer has not mentioned in the assessment order as to on which date, he called for TDS deduction and further observed that the assessee either deducted the TDS or deducted the TDS at lower rate, therefore, in view of this uncontroverted observation/finding, the stand of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal) is affirmed. Thus, this ground of the Revenue is dismissed.

11 M/s JSM Corporation P. Ltd. to 6925/Mum/2016 7. Now, we shall take up the appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14 (ITA No.6925/Mum/2016), wherein, identical grounds has been raised. Considering the aforesaid decisions for Assessment Year 2012-13, wherein, identical grounds/issues has been raised. The Ld. DR advanced identical arguments, therefore, our decision of Assessment Year 2012-13 will squarely covers the grounds/issues raised for this year also, resultantly, the appeal of the Revenue, on the same reasoning is dismissed.

Finally, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed.

This Order was pronounced in the open court in the presence of ld. DR at the conclusion of the hearing on 05/07/2018.

More judgments on Section 69C

All 8,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69C →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →