DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), CHENNAI vs. AUROMATRIX HOTELS P. LTD., CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1839/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 June 2018AY 2012-133 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 confirmed the deletion of disallowance under Section 14A as the assessee earned no exempt income, following the jurisdictional High Court's judgment. The disallowance under Section 43B was also confirmed as the employee contribution was deposited within the due date for filing the return.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the order of the CIT(Appeals) concerning disallowances made under Section 14A and Section 43B of the Income-tax Act. The assessee had not earned any exempted income and had deposited employee contributions before the due date for filing the return.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A is permissible when no exempt income is earned, and whether disallowance under Section 43B is justified for employee contributions deposited before the return filing due date.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 43B

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE

For Respondent: Shri G. Seetharaman, CA
Hearing: 05.06.2018Pronounced: 05.06.2018

आदेश /O R D E R

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

1.

This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) -1, Chennai, dated 22.05.2017 and pertains to assessment year 2012-13.

2.

The first ground of appeal is with regard to disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').

3.

We heard Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative and Shri G. Seetharaman, the Ld. representative for the assessee. Admittedly, the assessee has not earned any exempted income. Therefore, the CIT(Appeals) by placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in Redington (India) Ltd. v.

Addl. CIT (2017) (1) TMI 318 dated 23.12.2016, deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. Since the CIT(Appeals) has followed the judgment of jurisdictional High Court, which is binding on all the authorities, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.

4.

The next ground of appeal is with regard to disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 43B of the Act in respect of employees contribution.

5. We heard Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, the Ld. Departmental Representative and Shri G. Seetharaman, the Ld. representative for the assessee. The CIT(Appeals) by placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in CIT v. Industrial Security and Intelligence India (P.) Ltd. in TC(A). No.585 & 586 of 2015, allowed the claim of the assessee. It is not in dispute that the employees contribution was deposited before the due date for filing the return of income. Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.

6.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 5th June, 2018 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →