ACIT, MADURAI vs. RAJA RAM FLOUR MILLS P. LTD., TIRUMANGALAM
In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The CIT(Appeals) correctly restricted the disallowance under Section 14A to the extent of the exempt dividend income, following the Madras High Court judgment in Redington (India) Ltd.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the CIT(Appeals) order concerning disallowance under Section 14A for AY 2013-14. The assessee had received dividend income of ₹13,050 which was claimed as exempt.
What were the issues?
Whether the disallowance under Section 14A should be restricted to the extent of exempt income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
आदेश /O R D E R
PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal of the Revenue is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Madurai, dated 07.03.2017 and pertains to assessment year 2013-14.
The only issue arises for consideration is with regard to disallowance made by the Assessing Officer under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act').
No one appeared for the assessee inspite of service of notice of hearing. Therefore, we heard the Ld. Departmental Representative and proceeded to dispose the appeal on merit.
We heard Smt. Ruby George, the Ld. D.R. and perused the relevant material available on record. The CIT(Appeals) found that the assessee has received dividend income only to the extent of ₹13,050/- during the year under consideration, which was claimed as exempted from taxation. By placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2017) 1 TM 1318, the CIT(Appeals) found that the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act could be restricted only to the extent of ₹13,050/- which was received as exempted income. Since the CIT(Appeals) has followed the judgment of Madras High Court in Redington (India) Ltd. (supra), this Tribunal does not find any reason to interfere with the order of the lower authority and accordingly the same is confirmed.
In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Sita Enterprises vs. Office Of The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026