Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG & MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.778 & 779/Chd/2017 (Assessment Year : 2012-13 & 2013-14)
M/s Chandigarh Distillers Vs. The D.C.I.T., Bottlers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle II, SCO 140-141, Ludhiana. Sector 34-A, Chandigarh, PAN No. AABCC3752B (Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Shri Sudhir Sehgal, Adv. Respondent by : Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT Date of hearing :19.03.2018 Date of Pronouncement :20.06.2018
ORDER Per Sanjay Garg, Judicial Member :
The captioned appeals have been preferred by the
same sassessee against the separate orders of the
Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana
[hereinafter referred to as ‘CIT(Appeals)] dated 6.2.2017,
passed u/s 250(6 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the
Act’) in Appeal Nos.49/IT/CIT(A)-5/Ldh/2015-16 &
399/IT/CIT(A)-5/Ldh/2015-16 relating to assessment year
2012-13 and 2013-14 respectively.
Since identical issues have been raised in both the
appeals, the same were heard together and are being
disposed off by this consolidated order.
2 ITA No.778 779/Chd/2017 AYs: 2012-13 & 2013-14
The only issue involved in this appeal is relating to the
disallowance made u/s 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in
short 'the Act') read with Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the I.T. Act.
At the outset, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited
our attention to the impugned orders of the CIT(A) and
pointed out that for the impugned assessment years there
was no tax exempt income earned by the assessee. The Ld.
counsel has further submitted that the issue is now
squarely covered by the numerous decisions of the various
High Courts including that of the Jurisdictional High Court
of Punjab and Haryana in the case of CIT, Faridabad Vs.
Lakhani Marketing Inc.’, 226 Taxman 45 (P&H) and in the
case of ‘CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles’ (2009) 319 ITR 204 (P&H),
Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of ‘Cheminvest Ltd Vs.
ITO’ (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) and of the Hon'ble Gujarat
High Court in the case of ‘Corrtech Energy P. Ltd. (2014) 45
Taxman.com 116’ and further of the Hon'ble Allahabad High
Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd’
(2014) 272 CTR (All) 277 and various other case laws. In all
the above referred to case laws, the Hon'ble High Courts have
been unanimous to hold that no disallowance is attracted u/s
14A of the Act in case the assessee has not earned any income
not forming part of the total income.
In view of the above legal proposition, no disallowance
u/s 14A is warranted in this case and hence, the disallowance
made by the lower authorities is hereby ordered to be deleted.
3 ITA No.778 779/Chd/2017 AYs: 2012-13 & 2013-14
In the result both the appeals of the assessee are hereby
allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 20.06.2018
Sd/- Sd/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 20th June, 2018 *Rati* Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. The CIT 5. The DR Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Chandigarh