D.C.I.T., CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Vikram Power Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata
In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed
ITA 2528/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2022AY 2016-17
Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Cc-2(2), Kolkata M/S. Vikram Power Ventures Pvt. Ltd. 4Th Floor, Tobacco House, Vs. 1, Old Court, House Corner, Kolkata – 700001. [Pan: Aadcv 9743 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Acit Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 11.09.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 20, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act [Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’]. The Revenue In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “I. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata Has Erred In Law To Hold That Disallowances U/S 14A Read With 8D For The A.Y. 2016- 17 Will Not Apply Where No Exempt Income In Received Or Receivable During The Relevant Previous Year By Ignoring The Provision Of Rule 8D That Provides For Computation Of Expenditure In Respect Of Not Only Those Investments, Income From Which Does Not Form Part Of Total Income But Also Those Investments, Income From Which Shall Not Form Part Of Total Income. Ii. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata Has Erred In Law In Deciding That Disallowance U/S 14A Read With Rule 8D Cannot Be Made In A Year In Which No Exempt Income Has Been Earned Or Received By The Assessee Without Considering The Cbdt’S Circular No. 03/2018 Dated 11.07.2018 & Correct Computation Under Rule 8D.
For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Partha Pratim Barman, ACIT
Section 14Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250
…made. Irrespective of whether the investment yielded exempted income or not and therefore, the order of AO be restored. 6. Per contra, the ld. AR of the assessee relied on the order of ld. CIT(A). He contended that PCIT vs IL&FS Energy Development Pvt. Ltd. (399 ITR 483) after considering the Board Circular No. 5/2014 has upheld the assessee’s contention that in absence of any exempt income earned in the year in question the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is unwarranted. 7. We have heard both the parties and we deem it fit to deal with the CBDT’s Circular No. 5/2014 relied upon the revenue and it is not well s…
