EASTERN INVESTMENTS LIMITED,BHUBANESWAR, ODISHA vs. A.C.I.T., CIRCLE - 2(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Present for: Appellant by : Shri S. Bhattacharya, AR Respondent by : Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 19.09.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 19.11.2024 O R D E R

PER RAKESH MISHRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

2. Grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:

“1. That the Commissioner (Appeals), NFAC was wrong in dismissing the appeal of the appellant.

Eastern Investments Ltd., AY: 2010-11 2. That without prejudice to the contention raised in Ground No.1 above, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC failed to appreciate that there could not be any disallowance of any amount which had not been claimed for deduction and thus the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) was wrong in not holding that the disallowance u/s. 14A could not exceed Rs.17,17,861/- being the amount of expenses which had remained as expenses claimed for deduction.

before or at the time of hearing of the appeal.”

3. We have heard the rival contentions and also perused the material available on record and the paper book filed.

4. Ground Nos. 1 and 3 are general in nature and do not require any adjudication.

“1. Rs.6,09,000/- being filing fees paid to the ROC .

of the assessee: “Thus, it is clearly forthcoming from the above extract of the order dated 20.04.2015 that exactly identical contentions raised by the appellant have already been deliberated upon and stand adjudicated by not accepting such contentions by the then CIT(A)-5, Kolkata in his Order passed u/s 250 [supra]. In view of the above, the merits of the same cannot be revisited again in the present appellate proceedings arising from the appeal filed against the OGE Order passed by the Ld. AO on 20.03.2013. This is also clear from the fact that in this respect the Ld. AO has dutifully given effect to/followed this decision of the Ld. CIT(A) contained in the first appellate order dated 20.04.2015 while giving effect to such order and hence, there is no cause to interfere on this count with the impugned order which is only an Order Giving Effect Order. Thus, the corresponding grounds cannot be accepted and are DISMISSED.”

7. Thus, it is evident that the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated upon the contention raised by the assessee that the disallowance u/s. 14A cannot exceed the expenses claimed. Before us, the assessee filed the audited Balance Sheet and P&L Account for the year ended on 31.03.2010 and the computation of the total income for the AY 2010-11 and brought our attention to the fact that the total expenditure of Rs.25,21,000/- was claimed before arriving at the profit before tax at Rs.1,19,265/-. The details of the expenditure are as per Schedule 12 to the P & L Account. Since the issue has not been adjudicated by the Ld. CIT(A), the Ld. AR requested that the matter may be remitted back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudicating afresh on this ground of appeal. Accordingly, the order of the Ld. CIT(A) is set aside to decide this limited issue of disallowance being limited to Rs.17,17,861/- as against Rs.64,69,000/- made by the Ld. AO in accordance with law. The assessee shall file the Eastern Investments Ltd., AY: 2010-11 relevant details before the Ld.CIT(A) in support of its claim that the disallowance could not exceed Rs.17,17,861/- as claimed. Thus, this ground of appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on19th November, 2024.