SMC GLOBAL SECURITIES LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. JCIT, SPECIAL RANGE 8, NEW DELIH

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7816/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 January 2022AY 2013-144 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 admitted the additional ground and held that investments not yielding exempt income should be excluded from the calculation of average investment, following a Special Bench decision. Consequently, other grounds related to disallowances were dismissed as infructuous.

What were the facts?

The assessee challenged a disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The assessee filed an additional ground of appeal arguing that only investments yielding exempt income should be considered for calculating the disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether investments not yielding exempt income should be excluded when calculating disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D.

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, DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD & SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA

For Appellant: Shri Salil Kapoor, Advocate, Shri Sunil Lalwani, Advocate, Shri Umesh Takyar, Sr. DR

आदेश/O R D E R

PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA, AM:

1.

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-28, New Delhi (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 16.10.2017 under 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning A.Y. 2013-14.

2.

As per its grounds of appeal

the assessee has challenged the disallowance of Rs.96,85,003/- made by the AO u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D of the ITAT Rules.

3. When the matter was called for hearing, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the assessee has moved additional ground of appeal under Rule 11 of the IT Rules (Income Tax ITAT Rules, 1963) whereby as per ground No.5 therein the assessee has sought relief from disallowance u/s. 14A on the ground that only those investment are to be considered for concluding average value of investment which yielded exempt income during the year. It was submitted that the issue involved is purely legal in nature and arises from the facts on record and consequently urged for its admission and disposal at the threshold. Considering the force in the submissions made by the assessee for admission of the additional grounds, we admit the additional grounds for adjudication.

4. We have considered the rival submissions on the issue involved and have perused the orders of the lower authorities. As per the additional ground No.5 of the assessee’s appeal, the assessee has contended having regard to the judicial interpretation for the purposes of disallowance u/s.14A r.w.r. 8D of the Act, the investments which did not yield any exempt income during the year are required to be excluded and only those investment are to be considered for average value of investment which yield exempt income during the year. We find that the aforesaid proposition is duly supported by the decision of the Special Bench in ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment Private Limited (2017) 165 ITD 27 (Del) (SB). Similar view has been expressed by coordinate Benches including Shiv Narayan Nemani Shares and Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT (2021) 132 taxmann.com 244 (Mumbai). The additional ground is accordingly adjudicated in favour of the assessee.

5.

It was submitted on behalf of the assessee that once the ground No.5 of the additional ground of appeal

is adjudicated in favour of the assessee, the grievance raised as per other grounds in the appeal memo and the additional ground memo ceases to exist. Hence, in view of the submissions made on behalf of the assessee, other grounds concerning other aspects of disallowances u/s.14A are dismissed as infructuous.

6. The order of the CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored back to the file of the AO for quantification of the disallowance under s.14A qua the investments which have yield tax free income alone.

7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

8. The above decision was pronounced on conclusion of virtual hearing in the open court on 23/12/2021.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →