ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 5(2), CHENNAI vs. PON PURE CHEM. PT. LTD., CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2854/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 April 2018AY 2013-144 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 CIT(A)'s order, following the decisions of a co-ordinate bench and the Delhi High Court. The Revenue's appeals were dismissed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict disallowance under Section 14A to the extent of exempt income. The assessee had earned 'Nil' dividend income for the assessment years in question.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A is permissible when there is no exempt income, and if so, to what extent.

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, ‘ C’ BENCH : CHENNAI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI S.JAYARAMAN

Heard together (4 matters)

I.T.A.Nos.2854/CHNY/2017
C.O No.15/CHNY/2018
I.T.A.Nos.2855/CHNY/2017
C.O No.16/CHNY/2018

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R

PER BENCH

1.

These are appeals files by the Revenue against the common order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai in & 2855/CHNY/2017 :- 2 -:

Income-tax Appeal Nos.131 & 130/16-17/A-3 dated 30.08.2017 for assessment years 2013-14 & 2013-14 and correspondingly, the assessee filed Cross Objections in support of the order of Ld.CIT(A).

Mr.N.Madhavan, ACIT represented on behalf of Revenue and 2.

Mr.G.Baskar & Ms.A.Sushma Harini, Advocates represented on behalf of assessee.

It was submitted by the ld.D.R that the only issue in both 3. these Revenue’s appeals was against the action of the Ld.CIT(A) in restricting the disallowance made by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act,1961 (in short ‘the Act’) read with Rule-8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962 (in short ‘Rule’) to the extent of exempt income, following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s.Rayalla Corporation (P) Ltd. It was the submission that the Department has filed an appeal against the said decision before the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court and the same is pending. It was the submission that the order of Ld.CIT(A) was liable to be reversed and that the order of ld. Assessing Officer to be restored.

4.

In reply, ld.A.R submitted that the assessee had earned “Nil” dividend income for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 on & 2855/CHNY/2017 :- 3 -:

account of investment in shares. It was the submission that the issue was squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt Ltd., Vs. C.I.T reported in (2015)

372 ITR 0694 (Delhi), as also the decision in the case of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of M/s.Rayalla Corporation (P) Ltd. in ITA No.908/Mds./2015 vide order dated 16.10.2015. It was the submission that the order of the CIT(Appeals) was liable to be upheld.

5.

We have considered the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. As it is noticed that the issue in these appeals is squarely covered by the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in M/s.Rayalla Corporation (P) Ltd. referred supra wherein the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal also followed the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt Ltd., Vs. C.I.T referred supra and as it is noticed that, the Ld.CIT(A) has followed the judicial discipline in following the decision of Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in M/s.Rayalla Corporation (P) Ltd. referred supra, we find no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(Appeals) and both the appeals filed by the Department stand dismissed. & 2855/CHNY/2017 :- 4 -:

6.

At the time of hearing, ld.A.R submitted that she did not wish to press the objections raised in both the Cross-objections by the assessee, consequently, both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee are dismissed as not pressed.

7.

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue for assessment years 2013-14 & 2014-15 are dismissed and both the Cross Objections filed by the assessee stand dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court after conclusion of hearing on 10th April, 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 →