DARSHAN D. SHAH,MUMBAI vs. ASST CIT 21(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4959/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 January 2018AY 2011-124 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the entire expenditure could not be considered as related to exempt income, as the assessee also earned salary which is assessable as business income. Therefore, the issue needed to be re-examined.

What were the facts?

The assessee, a partner in a firm, incurred expenditure and claimed it. The Assessing Officer disallowed the entire expenditure under Section 14A, considering it related to income not forming part of total income.

What were the issues?

Whether the entire expenditure claimed by the assessee is disallowable under Section 14A when the assessee has earned both taxable salary and share of profit from a partnership firm.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “L” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM

For Appellant: Shri Dhivendra M. Shah, Shri M. V. Rajguru
For Respondent: Shri M. V. Rajguru

O R D E R Per Shamim Yahya, A. M.: This appeal by the assessee is directed against order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-37, Mumbai dated 10.06.2016 and pertains to assessment year 2011-12.

2.

The grounds of appeal

read as under:

1.

1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition made of Rs.9,97,032/- u/s.14A of the Act, which addition should be deleted.

(A.Y.2011-12) Shri Darshan D. Shah vs. Asst.CIT 2. The learned CIT(A) failed to appreciate that, the expenditure incurred is in earning of the taxable income and that the provisions of Section 14A are not attracted.

3. The learned assessing officer and the CIT(A) has failed to point out which of the expenses relate to the exempt income.

4. Without prejudice, and anything being admitted to the contrary the CIT(A) erred in confirming the whole of the addition which amount should be reduced.

3.

Brief facts of the case are as under:

The assessee is an individual. He is a partner in the firm M/s. Vikman Steel Ball Industries. The assessee has share of profit, remuneration as working partner and interest on its capital. The assessee has incurred expenditure of Rs.9,97,032/- during the course of business and claimed expenditure accordingly. The Assessing Officer has held that as per the provision of section 14A of I. T. Act for the purpose of computing the total income, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not form part of the total income.

4.

Before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee submitted that during the appellate proceedings the assessee had stated that the disallowance of whole of the expenses of Rs.9,97,032/- u/s. 14A is not only contrary to the facts and evidence on record but also contrary to the provisions of section 14A of the Act and, hence, bad in law. The provisions of section 14A are attracted only in case where an (A.Y.2011-12) Shri Darshan D. Shah vs. Asst.CIT expenditure incurred by an assessee in relation to income which did not form part of the total income under the Act could only be disallowed.

5.

However, the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not convinced.

He upheld the action of the assessing officer, by holding as under:

The expenditure can be considered as incurred by the appellat for earning salary, remuneration as well as share profit of partnership firm. Since partnersip firm, for the purpose of Income Tax Act, it is separate assessable entity therefore indirect expenditure incurred for earning salary, remuneration as well as share of profit from the firm was allowable to the extent incurred by the firm. And expenditure incurred by the partner is to be taxed in the hands of the partner. Income charged in the hands of partnership firm cannot be treated as being a non exempt income in the hands of partner of such firm. Relying on above decision, provision of 14A of I. T. Act would be applicable for computing the total income of partner. Hence, disallowance made by the A.O. is confirmed. This ground of appeal is dismissed.

6.

Against this order, the assessee is in appeal before us.

7.

We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that the assessee has earned salary from the partnership firm which is assessable as business income. In such scenario, the entire expenditure claimed by the assessee cannot be said to be in respect of earning exempt share of profits from the partnership firm. In these circumstances, in our considered opinion, the issue needs to be remitted to the file of the assessing officer. The assessing officer shall examine the issue afresh and allow those expenditures which are not in relationship to the earning of exempt income from the partnership firm.

8.

Both the counsel fairly agreed to this proposition.

(A.Y.2011-12) Shri Darshan D. Shah vs. Asst.CIT 9. In the result, this appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 04.01.2018 Sd/- Sd/- (Sandeep Gosain) (Shamim Yahya) �या�यक सद�य / Judicial Member लेखा सद�य / Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated : 04.01.2018 व.�न.स./Roshani, Sr. PS आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 1. ��यथ� / The Respondent 2. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT(A) 3. आयकर आयु�त / CIT - concerned 4. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गाड� फाईल / Guard File 6. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →