PR COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 vs. KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION LTD

PDF · subscribers
ITA/288/2021HC KarnatakaKAHC01037185202106 December 2021Bench: S.SUJATHA,HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR5 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue were already decided against them in an identical appeal for AY 2011-12. Therefore, no new substantial question of law arose.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the ITAT's order concerning the disallowance of Rs. 29,26,30,066/- under Section 14A read with Rule 8D for AY 2014-15. The ITAT had set aside this disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether the Tribunal was right in setting aside the disallowance under Section 14A and Rule 8D when the ingredients of the section were satisfied and whether the Tribunal's order was perverse.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 260-A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

DATED THIS THE 06TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2021

PRESENT

THE HON’BLE MRS.JUSTICE S.SUJATHA

AND

THE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE HANCHATE SANJEEVKUMAR

I.T.A.No.288/2021

BETWEEN:

1.

PR. COMMISSIONER OF

INCOME TAX-2,

BMTC COMPLEX,

KORMANGALA, BANGALORE.

2.

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER

OF INCOME TAX,

CIRCLE-4(1)(1),

BANGALORE. ...APPELLANTS

(BY SRI SANMATHI E.I., ADVOCATE)

AND:

KARNATAKA STATE FINANCIAL CORPORATION LTD., KSFC BHAVAN, NO.1/1, THIMMAIAH ROAD, NEAR CANTONMENT RAILWAY STATION, BENGALURU-560 052. PAN: AAACK9480H …RESPONDENT

- 2 -

THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL IS FILED UNDER SECTION 260-A OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961, ARISING OUT OF ORDER DATED 04/03/2021 PASSED IN ITA NO.1420/BANG/2019, FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014- 2015 AND ETC.,

THIS APPEAL COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, S. SUJATHA, J., DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

O R D E R

This appeal is filed by the Revenue under Section 260-A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) assailing the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” Bench, Bangalore, (“Tribunal” for short) dated 04.03.2021 relating to the assessment year 2014- 15.

2.

The substantial questions of law raised by the Revenue read as under:

“1. Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and law, the Tribunal is right in law in setting

- 3 -

aside the disallowance of Rs.29,26,30,066/- as the ingredients of Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2) are satisfied in the case of the assessee and without appreciating that the investment in the form of share application money by the company would only result in exempt income and provision of Section 14A would clearly apply?

2.

Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal’s order can be said as perverse as the Tribunal has allowed the appeal of the assessee in respect of disallowance of Section 14A read with Rule 8D as well despite the fact that the provisions to Section 14A makes it clear that expenditure relating to the earning of exempt income has to be worked out as per said Rules and assessing authority has computed said disallowances, which is attributable to the earning of exempt income as per CBDT Circular No.5 of 2014 dated 11/2/2014, wherein Board has made it clear that said disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D has to be made even when there assessee has not having exempt income in a particular year?”

- 4 -

3.

The Tribunal considering the identical issues in the assessee’s own case relating to the assessment year 2011-12 has rejected the appeal filed by the Revenue. It is significant to note that the Revenue has preferred ITA.No.168/2019 against the said order of the Tribunal passed in ITA.No.427/Bang/2017 dated 24.09.2018 relating to the assessment year 2011-12 and the same came to be dismissed by the Co-ordinate Bench of this Court as per the order dated 26.03.2021 observing that an identical appeal has already been decided and the question of law has been answered against the Revenue and accordingly, answered substantial questions of law in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.

4.

In the light of the aforesaid, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration in the present case also.

- 5 -

5.

In the result, appeal stands dismissed.

In view of dismissal of the main matter, all pending I.As. stand disposed of accordingly.

Sd/- JUDGE

Sd/- JUDGE

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →