DCIT, CIRCLE- 11(1), NEW DELHI vs. HERO SOLAR ENERGY (P) LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 387/DEL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 March 2019AY 2014-153 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, following the Delhi High Court's ruling that no disallowance under Section 14A can be made if there is no exempt income.

What were the facts?

The Assessing Officer disallowed expenses under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, even though the assessee earned no exempt income. The CIT(A) deleted this disallowance, relying on High Court precedents.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A is permissible when the assessee has not earned any exempt income.

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(2)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 ‘C’, NEW DELHI

Before: SH. N. K. BILLAIYA & SH. K.N CHARY

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, Advocate
Hearing: 19/03/2019Pronounced: 20/03/2019

This appeal is preferred against the order of the CIT(A)-35, New Delhi dated 05.10.2017 pertaining to A. Y.2014-15.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the revenue is that the CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs.2,03,30,249/-made u/s. 14A of the IT Act r.w. rule 8D.

2 3. The facts on record show that during the year under consideration the assessee did not earn any exempt income. The Assessing Officer was of the firm belief that even there is no exempt income still expenses have to be disallowed u/s 14A r.w rule 8D of the IT Rules. He accordingly computed the disallowance at Rs.2,03,30,249/- and added to the income of the assessee.

4.

The assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) and pointed out that the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CHEM Invest Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT reported 378 ITR 33 has held that if there is no exempt income no disallowance can be made.

5.

After considering the reply of the assessee, the CIT(A) found that the ratio laid down by Hon’ble Delhi High Court clearly applies in the case of the assessee and accordingly deleted the addition.

6.

Before us the DR strongly supported the findings of the Assessing Officer but could not bring any distinguishing decision.

7.

It is an undisputed fact that during the year the assessee did not earn any exempt income. The Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of CHEM Invest Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (supra) has clearly held that if there is no exempt income no disallowance can be made. This was subsequently followed by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of PCIT Vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Limited reported 399 ITR 483.

3 8. Respectfully following the decisions of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court of Delhi we decline to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A), in the result the appeal filed by the revenue is accordingly dismissed.

9.

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is accordingly dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 20.03.2019.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →