ITO 5(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ARKO ENTERPRISES P. LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5166/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 June 2016AY 2010-112 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 held that the disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the actual expenditure incurred by the assessee for earning exempt income. Since the CIT(A) had already restricted the disallowance to the actual expenditure, the Tribunal found no reason to interfere.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which restricted the disallowance under Section 14A. The Assessing Officer had made a disallowance of Rs. 35,38,248/-, while the CIT(A) restricted it to Rs. 1,99,825/-, which was the actual expenditure incurred.

What were the issues?

Whether the disallowance under Section 14A should be restricted to the actual expenditure incurred for earning exempt income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM

Hearing: 01/06/2016Pronounced: 01/06/2016

PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M): This is an appeal filed by the revenue against the order of CIT(A), Mumbai, for the assessment year 2010-2011

2.

In this appeal the revenue is aggrieved for restricting disallowance u/s.14A to Rs.1,99,825/- in place of disallowance made by AO at Rs.35,38,248/-.

3.

Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. In the course of assessment, the AO made disallowance by computing interest and other expenses as per rule 8D. By the impugned order the CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to the extent of expenditure actually incurred.

4.

We have considered rival contentions. As per our considered view, disallowance u/s.14A cannot be more than the actual expenditure claimed by the assessee. Only the expenditure which have been incurred for earning the exempt income can be disallowed u/s.14A. Since the CIT(A) has restricted the disallowance to the extent of an actual expenditure of Rs.1,99,825/-, we do not find any reason to interfere in the order of CIT(A).

5.

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on this 01/06/ 2016. (RAM LAL NEGI) (R.C.SHARMA) न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक Dated 01/06/2016 प्र.कु.मभ/pkm, नन.स/ PS आदेश की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीराथी / The Appellant 1. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. 2. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A), Mumbai. 3. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT 4. ववबागीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. गार्ा पाईर / Guard file. 6. आदेशाि सार/ BY ORDER, सत्मावऩत प्रनत //// उप/सहायक पुंजीकार (Asstt.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →