DCIT, C-4, LUDHIANA vs. M/S AARTI STEELS LIMITED, LUDHIANA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 633/CHANDI/2018Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 September 2018AY 2007-082 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision to restrict the disallowance under Section 14A to the amount of tax-exempt income. This was based on various High Court decisions, including the jurisdictional Punjab and Haryana High Court.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed the CIT(A)'s order which restricted the disallowance under Section 14A to the extent of tax-exempt dividend income earned by the assessee. The CIT(A) followed previous tribunal decisions for the assessee.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance under Section 14A should be restricted to the amount of tax-exempt income earned by the assessee.

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(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, DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & DR. B.R.R. KUMAR

For Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta
Hearing: 04/09/2018Pronounced: 04/09/2018

Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member:

The present appeal has been preferred by the Revenue against the order

of the Commissioner of Income Tax(A)-2 (hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(A)’) dt.

02/02/2018.

2.

Sole issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is against the action of the

CIT(A) in restricting the disallowance under section 14A of the Act in relation to

the expenditure incurred for earning of Tax exempt dividend income to the

extent of the tax exempt income earned by the assessee.

3.

The Ld. CIT(A) restricted the disallowance under section 14A of the Act to

the extent of tax exempt income earned by the assessee by following the

decision of the Tribunal in the own case of the assessee for earlier A.Y’s 2008-09

and 2009-10. The issue, admittedly, is squarely covered by various decisions of

the High Courts including that of Jurisdictional Punjab and Haryana High Court

in the case of CIT Faridabad v. Lakhani Marketing INC 226 Taxmann 45 (P&H)

and also by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd.

Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) and further of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in

the case of CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 277 (All). In view of

this we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. There is

no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and the same is accordingly dismissed.

Order dictated and pronounced in the open Court on 04.09.2018

Sd/- Sd/- (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 03.12.2018 AG Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. The CIT 5. The DR

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →