NATESAN SYNCHROCONES PVT. LTD,CHENNAI vs. ACIT, CORPORATE CIRCLE-4(4), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2211/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai12 September 2018AY 2010-114 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the facts to be identical to previous assessment years where similar issues were remanded. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the lower authorities and directed the Assessing Officer to reconsider the disallowances.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the order of the CIT(A) concerning assessment year 2010-11. The appeal involved disallowances made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D and Section 40(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act.

What were the issues?

The key issues were the disallowance of expenses under Section 14A read with Rule 8D and the disallowance under Section 40(a)(i), both requiring reconsideration in light of Supreme Court judgments.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 40(a)(i)

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, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY

For Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, JCIT
Hearing: 03.07.2018Pronounced: 12.09.2018

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -8, Chennai, dated 21.08.2017 and pertains to assessment year 2010-11.

2.

The first issue arises for consideration is disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962.

3.

Shri S. Sridhar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, submitted that on identical situation, this Tribunal in the assessee's own case for assessment years 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2012-13, remanded back the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Ld.counsel submitted that for the year under consideration also the matter may be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer to consider the claim of the assessee in the light of the judgment of Apex Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v.

CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640. Referring to another disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act to the extent of ₹7,12,604/-, the Ld.counsel submitted that since the main issue is to be remanded back to the file of the Assessing Officer, the disallowance made under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act may also be remanded back to the Assessing Officer.

4.

We heard Shri A. Sasikumar, the Ld. Departmental Representative also. As rightly submitted by the Ld.counsel for the assessee, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 was remanded back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration for the assessment years 2011-12, 2013-14 and 2012-13. Since the facts are identical, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the matter needs to be reconsidered for the assessment year under consideration also.

Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the Assessing Officer is directed to reconsider the matter in the light of the judgment of Apex Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra) and thereafter decide the issue afresh in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

5.

Now coming to the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act.

6.

Since the main issue of disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the disallowance made under Section 40(a)(i) of the Act also needs to be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the entire issue is remitted back to the file of the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer shall re- examine the matter in the light of the material that may be filed by the assessee and thereafter decide the issue afresh in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

7.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →