UB INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECTS LIMITED vs. DCIT, BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1210/BANG/2016Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore31 March 2017AY 2010-114 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that disallowance under Section 14A is not possible in the absence of any exempt income. The Tribunal followed the Delhi High Court judgment in Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT, which stated that expenditure for earning exempt income cannot be worked out if no taxable income is earned.

What were the facts?

The assessee argued that no disallowance under Section 14A could be made as they had not earned any exempt income. The lower authorities had made a disallowance of Rs. 2,32,85,216/- under Section 14A read with Rule 8D.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A is permissible when the assessee has not earned any exempt income. Whether interest under Sections 234B and 234C is leviable on returned income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 8D,Section 234B,Section 234C

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 : BANGALORE

Before: SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN

For Appellant: Shri K.R. Pradeep, CA
For Respondent: Shri M.K. Biju, JCIT(ITAT-3)(DR)
Hearing: 28.03.2017Pronounced: 31.03.2017

Per Sunil Kumar Yadav, Judicial Member

1.

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order of the CIT(Appeals) inter alia on the following grounds:-

“1. That the order of the assessing officer in so far as it is against the appellant is against the law, facts, circumstances, natural justice, equity, without jurisdiction, bad in law and all other known principles of law. 2. That the total income computed and the total tax computed is hereby disputed.

3.

That the order of the authorities below is based on surmises, conjectures, assumptions and presumptions and not based on facts emerging from records and hence requires to be vacated on this ground alone.

4. That the learned authorities below erred in making disallowance u/s 14A rwr 8D of the Act amounting to Rs. 2,32,85,216/-. 5. That the learned authorities below erred in not appreciating that when there is no tax free income, there cannot be any expenditure incurred for earning exempt income. 6. That the learned authorities below erred in not following the binding/relevant decisions of the higher appellate authorities on the issue. 7. The appellant denies the liability for interest u/s 234B & 234C of the Act. Further prays that interest if any should be levied only on the returned income. 8. No opportunity has been given before levy of interest u/s 234B & 234C of the IT Act. 9. Without prejudice to the appellant's right of seeking waiver before appropriate authority the appellant begs for consequential relief in the levy of interest u/s. 234B & 234C of the Act. 10. For the above and other grounds and reasons which may be submitted during the course of hearing of this appeal, the assessee requests that the appeal be allowed as prayed and justice be rendered.”

2.

Though various grounds are raised, but they all relate to the disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”].

3. During the course of hearing, the ld. counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the fact that the assessee has not received any exempted dividend income. Therefore, in the absence of any exempt income, disallowance us/. 14A is not possible. In support of this contention, he placed reliance upon the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Del). In order to demonstrate that assessee does not have any exempt income, our attention was invited to the copy of the Profit & Loss account and the Balance Sheet which is available at pages 27 to 28 of the compilation of the assessee.

4.

The ld. DR placed reliance upon the order of the CIT(Appeals).

5.

Having carefully examined the orders of lower authorities in the light of rival submissions and the judgments referred to by the parties, we find that undisputedly the assessee does not have any exempted income, therefore disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act cannot be made. We have also examined the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in which Their Lordships have categorically held that where the assessee had not earned any taxable income in the relevant assessment year in question, then the corresponding expenditure could not be worked out for disallowance.

Thus, no disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act can be made in the year in which no exempt income had been earned or received by the assessee. The view taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has been consistently followed by the Tribunal in a series of cases. In the light of these facts, we are of the view that disallowance u/s. 14A is not sustainable. We accordingly set aside the order of CIT(Appeals) and delete the disallowance made u/s. 14A of the Act.

6.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed.

Pronounced in the open court on this 31st day of March, 2017.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →