M/S.KERALA CARS P.LTD,COCHIN vs. ACIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 1(1), COCHIN

PDF · subscribers
ITA 270/COCH/2023Status: DisposedITAT Cochin23 October 2024AY 2011-12Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara (Judicial Member), Shri Amarjit Singh (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal deleted the disallowance under Section 14A as the assessee had no exempt income. For the disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii), the tribunal accepted the assessee's claim in principle, allowing the Assessing Officer to verify the fund position.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre for AY 2011-12. The appeal dealt with disallowances under Section 14A and Section 36(1)(iii) of the Income Tax Act.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A is applicable when no exempt income is earned, and whether interest-bearing funds diverted to sister concerns for non-business purposes attract disallowance under Section 36(1)(iii).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 36(1)(iii)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(3)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, COCHIN BENCH, COCHIN

Before: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CA
For Respondent: Smt. V. Swarnalatha, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 23.08.2024Pronounced: 23.10.2024

O R D E R Per Bench This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2011-12 arises against the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [CIT(A)]’s DIN & Order No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2022- 23/1050020571(1) dated 22.02.2023 in proceedings u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act).

Heard both the parties. Case file perused

2.

Learned counsel for assessee does not pressed it’s substantive ground Nos. 1 & 2 with a rider that the same shall not be treated as a precedent in any other assessment year. Ordered accordingly.

Kerala Cars Pvt. Ltd. Coming to the third issue of disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. rule 8D of 3. Rs.25,23,155/- it emerges at the outset that the assessee had not derived any exempt income in the relevant previous year. That being the case we quote CIT vs. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd., [2022] 141 taxmann.com 289 (Del.) and PCIT vs. Kohinoor Projects (P) Ltd., [2020] 121 taxmann.com 177 (Bom.) to name a few judicial precedents, to conclude that the impugned disallowance does not apply in absence of any exempt income. Deleted accordingly.

4.

Next comes section 36(1)(iii) disallowance of Rs. 43,24,427/- made in both lower proceedings alleging diversion of assessee’s interest bearing funds for non- business purposes in advancing loans to sister concerns. Learned counsel for the assessee ‘s only case is that the assessee had advanced the impugned loans to the sister concerns out of its interest free funds and therefore, the same is not sustainable going by CIT v. Reliance Utility and Power Ltd. [2009] 313 ITR 340 (Bom.). That being the case, we deem it appropriate to accept the assessee’s instant last substantive ground in principle and leave it open for the Assessing Officer to verify it’s fund position in very terms. Ordered accordingly.

5.

This assessee’s appeal allowed in above terms.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →