ESSVEE INVESTMENT ADVISORS P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 3(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2968/MUM/2012Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 May 2018AY 2008-093 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that shares held as stock-in-trade should not be excluded from average investment for disallowance computation. However, the disallowance under Section 14A should be restricted to the amount of exempt income received.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a company dealing in securities, received dividend income. The Assessing Officer (AO) made a disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D amounting to Rs. 67,38,678/-.

What were the issues?

Whether shares held as stock-in-trade should be excluded for disallowance under Section 14A, and whether the disallowance should be restricted to the exempt income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM

For Appellant: Shri Pravin Kumar Bafna
For Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Hearing: 18/05/2018Pronounced: 29/05/2018

आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M):

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)- 6, Mumbai dated 22/03/2018 for A.Y.2008-09 in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3) of the IT Act. 2. Only grievance of assessee relates to disallowance made u/s.14A r.w.Rule 8D amounting to Rs.67,38,678/-. 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. 4. Facts in brief are that assessee is dealing in securities and financial activities. During the year under consideration, assessee got dividend M/s. Essvee Investment Advisors Pvt. Ltd., income of Rs.23,91,501/-. However, AO made disallowance of Rs.67,38,678/- under Rules 8D.

5.

It was contention of learned AR that the shares held by assessee as stock in trade is to be excluded. As an alternate, it was argued that disallowance u/s.14A should be restricted to the amount of exempt income received during the year.

6.

We have considered rival contentions and do not find any merit in the contention of learned AR with regard to excluding the shares held as stock in trade while computing average investment on which disallowance is warranted in view of the recent decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Maxoop Investment, dated 12/02/2018,. However, with regard to assessee’s contention to restrict the disallowance to the extent of dividend income, we are inclined to agree, in view of the decision in the case of Delhi High Court in case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd., dated 25/02/2015. Respectfully following the proposition of law laid down by Hon’ble Delhi High Court, we direct the AO to restrict the disallowance u/s.14A to the extent of exempt income received during the year under consideration. We direct accordingly.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →