ITO COMPANY WARD 5(4), CHENNAI vs. RAI ISPAT PVT. LTD., CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2593/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 May 2018AY 2013-142 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 the disallowance under Section 14A. They found that the CIT(A) was justified in deleting the disallowance as no exempt income was claimed, citing the jurisdictional High Court's judgment.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the deletion of a disallowance made under Section 14A by the Assessing Officer. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance because the assessee had not claimed any exempt income during the assessment year.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A is warranted when no exempt income is claimed by the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

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’ (SMC

Before: SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY]

आदेश / O R D E R

PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

1.

In this appeal filed by the Revenue, which is directed against an order dated 31.07.2017 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, it has taken altogether three grounds of which ground No.1 & 3 are general needing no specific adjudication. Vide its ground No.2, grievance raised by the Department is 2.

on deletion of a disallowance made by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘’the Act’’).

2 -: 3. We have perused the orders and heard the contentions. What we find is that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had deleted the disallowance for a reason that assessee had not claimed any exempt income during the impugned assessment year. This has not been disputed by the ld. Departmental Representative. By virtue of the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Redington India Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 623, we are of the opinion that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was justified in deleting the disallowance made u/s.14A of the Act. Ground No.2 is dismissed.

4.

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →