Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

DCIT, Chennai vs. Shriram Epc Limited, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

…4/16 :- 27 -: consideration. Now the law is settled to the extent that in the absence of any exempt income resort to provisions of Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (i) (ii) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. Since the decision of the ld. CIT(A) is in consonance with the ratio laid down by the above decisions, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Grounds of appeal 2.5 to 2.7 raised by the Revenue stand dismissed. 46. Ground No.2.8 challenges the decisio…

Shriram Epc Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

…4/16 :- 27 -: consideration. Now the law is settled to the extent that in the absence of any exempt income resort to provisions of Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (i) (ii) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. Since the decision of the ld. CIT(A) is in consonance with the ratio laid down by the above decisions, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Grounds of appeal 2.5 to 2.7 raised by the Revenue stand dismissed. 46. Ground No.2.8 challenges the decisio…

Shriram Epc Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy]

…4/16 :- 27 -: consideration. Now the law is settled to the extent that in the absence of any exempt income resort to provisions of Section 14A of the Act cannot be made. Reference can be made to the following decisions Redington (India) Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 633, (i) (ii) CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics P. Ltd, 248 Taxman 55. Since the decision of the ld. CIT(A) is in consonance with the ratio laid down by the above decisions, we do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the ld. CIT(A). Grounds of appeal 2.5 to 2.7 raised by the Revenue stand dismissed. 46. Ground No.2.8 challenges the decisio…

Mahindra World City Developers Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.141 & 142/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Mahindra World City Developers Limited, Income Tax, Mahindra Towers, Ground Floor, Corporate Circle – 4(1), 17/18, Pattulous Road, Chennai – 34. Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.. Pan: Aaacm6904A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M. Viswanathan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J. Pavithran Kumar, Jcit

…resentative for the assessee submitted that there was no dividend income earned by the assessee during these years under consideration. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Redington (India) Ltd., Vs. Addl.CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633, there cannot be any disallowance U/s.14A of the Act. 4. We heard Shri Pavithran Kumar, the Ld. Departmental Representative also. According to the Ld.DR, interest expenditure was disallowed in the earlier assessment years also and this Tribunal by an 3 I.T.A. Nos. 141 & 142/Chny/2019 order dated 27.06.2018 confirmed the similar disallowance. C…

Mahindra World City Developers Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.141 & 142/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) Vs The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Mahindra World City Developers Limited, Income Tax, Mahindra Towers, Ground Floor, Corporate Circle – 4(1), 17/18, Pattulous Road, Chennai – 34. Anna Salai, Chennai – 600 002.. Pan: Aaacm6904A (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri M. Viswanathan, Ca ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By : Shri J. Pavithran Kumar, Jcit

…resentative for the assessee submitted that there was no dividend income earned by the assessee during these years under consideration. Therefore, in view of the judgment of the Madras High Court in the case of M/s. Redington (India) Ltd., Vs. Addl.CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633, there cannot be any disallowance U/s.14A of the Act. 4. We heard Shri Pavithran Kumar, the Ld. Departmental Representative also. According to the Ld.DR, interest expenditure was disallowed in the earlier assessment years also and this Tribunal by an 3 I.T.A. Nos. 141 & 142/Chny/2019 order dated 27.06.2018 confirmed the similar disallowance. C…

DCIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai vs. Pdr Investments Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

…is case. Moreover, according to the Ld. counsel, this Tribunal in Rayala Corporation Pvt. Ltd. found that the disallowance cannot exceed the exempted income earned by the assessee. Moreover, the Madras High Court in Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633 and CIT v. Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd. (2017) 80 taxmann.com 221 found that there cannot be any disallowance without any exempted income, therefore, the CIT(Appeals) has rightly restricted the disallowance to the exempted income earned by the assessee. 4 I.T.A. No.1273/Chny/18 5. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and…

Pdr Investments Pvt Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Cir-5(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 3187/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/S. Pdr Investments Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of 37, Lakshmi Bhavan, Thousand Lights, Vs. Income Tax, Chennai 600 006. Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaccp1177A ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 09.12.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 3, Chennai, Dated 28.09.2018 For The Assessment Year 2013-14 Passed Under Section 271(1)(C) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] In Levying Penalty Of ₹.87,26,857/-.

…on of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Chettinad Logsitics Private Limited (supra) has been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is also relevant here to mention the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Redington (India) Limited v. Addl. CIT 392 ITR 633, wherein, similar view was taken and in fact, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Chettinad Logistics Private Limited (supra) relied upon this decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Redington India Limited (supra) to hold and decide the 7 I.T.A. No.3187/Chny/18 issue in favour of the assessee. Thus, keeping in view decision of the…

Wabco India Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2606/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Wabco India Limited, Plot No. 3 (Sp), Iii Main Road, Income Tax, Ambattur Industrial Estate, Corporate Circle 3(2), Chennai 600 058. Chennai. [Pan: Aafca6421P] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : अपीलाथ" की ओर से/ Appellant By Shri S. Venkatasubramanian, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से /Respondent By : Shri A. Sundararajan, Addl. Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18.11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 26.12.2019

…’ble Madras High Court decision in case of Chettinad Logsitics Private Limited (supra) has been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is also relevant here to mention the decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Redington (India) Limited v. Addl. CIT 392 ITR 633, wherein, similar view was taken and in fact, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Chettinad Logistics Private Limited (supra) relied upon this decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Redington India Limited (supra) to hold and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. Thus, keeping in view decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Hi…

Sri Jayajothi Textile Mills (P) Ltd., Rajapalayam vs. ITO Corporate Ward 3, Madurai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1628 & 1413/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2013-14 M/S. Sri Jayajothi Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 154, Reddiapatti Road, Vs. Corporate Ward 3, Keelarajakularaman 626 136, Madurai. Rajapalayam Taluk, Tamil Nadu. [Pan:Aabcs5352B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri V. Srikrishnan, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Madurai, Dated 16.04.2019 & 15.04.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively. The Only Common Ground Raised In Both The Appeals Of The Assessee Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Made Under Section 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short) R.W. Rule 8D.

…2.1 Similarly, in the assessment year, the Assessing Officer disallowed ₹.42,925/- under section 14A of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance. 3. Before us, by relying on the decision in the case of Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 392 ITR 633 (Mad) and CIT v. Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd. reported in [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras), wherein, the Hon’ble Madras High Court has held that no disallowance of expenditure can be made by invoking provisions of section 14A of the Act, when there is no exempt income earned by the assessee, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that t…

Sri Jayajothi and Company Ltd., Rajapalayam vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 2, Madurai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 1628 & 1413/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2014-15 & 2013-14 M/S. Sri Jayajothi Textile Mills Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, 154, Reddiapatti Road, Vs. Corporate Ward 3, Keelarajakularaman 626 136, Madurai. Rajapalayam Taluk, Tamil Nadu. [Pan:Aabcs5352B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri V. Srikrishnan, C.A. ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 28.11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Separate Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Madurai, Dated 16.04.2019 & 15.04.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2014-15 & 2013-14 Respectively. The Only Common Ground Raised In Both The Appeals Of The Assessee Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Made Under Section 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short) R.W. Rule 8D.

…2.1 Similarly, in the assessment year, the Assessing Officer disallowed ₹.42,925/- under section 14A of the Act. On appeal, the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance. 3. Before us, by relying on the decision in the case of Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 392 ITR 633 (Mad) and CIT v. Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd. reported in [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras), wherein, the Hon’ble Madras High Court has held that no disallowance of expenditure can be made by invoking provisions of section 14A of the Act, when there is no exempt income earned by the assessee, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that t…

Smt. D. Sailaja, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in the manner indicated above

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2350/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Mrs. D. Sailaja, The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 4, 10Th Street, Nandanam Vs. Income Tax, Extension, Nandanam, Non Corporate Circle Ii, Chennai 600 035. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aaops2743J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri J. Purshothaman, C.A. Shri Guru Bashyam, Addl. Cit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 23.12.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

…amounting to ₹.1,01,02,703/- is nothing but salary and taxable under ‘income from salary’, which cannot be treated as exempt income, in case, if it is so and in the absence of any exempt income, the decision in the case of Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT 392 ITR 633 (Mad) and CIT v. Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd. reported in [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras) and subsequent decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in dismissing the SLP filed by the Department in the case of CIT v. Chettinad Logistics (P) reported in [2018] 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC) would come to the rescue of the assessee. Thus, the above submissio…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Rattha Holding Company Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2228/Chny/2019 धनिाजरण वर्ज /Assessment Year: 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of Income M/S. Rattha Holding Company Tax, Pvt. Limited., No.51, 6Th Floor, Tek Meadows, Corporate Circle-5(1), Vs. Room No.414,4Th Floor, Main Building, Rajiv Gandhi Salai, 121, Uthamar Gandhi Salai, Sholinganallur, Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai – 600 119. [Pan: Aaccr 8160K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) Mr. S. Bharath, Cit अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Ms. Hemalatha. K, Aca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 18.12.2019 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.12.2019 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai In Ita No.120/2017-18/A-3 Dated 29.05.2019 For The Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. Mr. S. Bharath, Cit Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue & Ms. Hemalatha. K, Aca Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee. :- 2 -: 3. The Only Issue In The Revenue’S Appeal Is Against The Action Of The Learned Cit(A) In Holding That The Provisions Of Section 14A R.W.Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Rules Are Applicable Only When The Assessee Earns Income Which Does Not Be Part Of His Total Income. It Was Fairly Agreed By Both The Sides For The Relevant Assessment Year That The Assessee Has Not Earned Any Exempt Income.

…decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the assessee’s own case in the assessment year 2014-15, wherein the Co- ordinate Bench following the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Redington India Limited vs. ACIT [2017] 77 Taxmann.com 257 (Mad) and the Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Chettinad Logistics (P) Limited [2017] 80 Taxmann.com 221 (Mad) had held that the assessee having not earned any exempt income, the provision of Section 14A cannot be invoked in the hands of the assessee. 5. In reply, the learned Departmental Representative vehemently supported the order of the…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Eih Associated Hotels Ltd., Chennai

In the result, both the appeal of the Revenue as well as the

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2831/Chny/2017 & C.O. No.35/Chny/2018 (In I.T.A. No.2831/Chny/2017) "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2007-08

…n short 'the Act'). 3. It is not in dispute that there was no exempt income earned by the assessee during the year under consideration. The CIT(Appeals) placing his reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633, has deleted the addition made by the Assessing Officer. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that when the CIT(Appeals) has placed his reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court, which is binding on all the authorities in State, there is no error in the order of the CIT(Appeals). Even in respect of investments made in subsidiary comp…

K.Vinoth Kannan DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Express News Papers Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is allowed for

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1483/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Express Newspapers Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax, V. “Express Estates”, Mount Road, Corporate Circle – 2(1), Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aaace 1702 G (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…ench of this Tribunal in Bellwether Microfinance Fund Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO in I.T.A. No.1743/Hyd/2013 dated 27.06.2014. The Ld. D.R. further 3 I.T.A. No.1483/Chny/19 submitted that the Madras High Court in the case of Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633 had no occasion to consider the language of Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. 3. On the contrary, Shri G. Baskar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee, very fairly submitted that in view of the judgment of Apex Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra), the investments made in subsidiary company for strategic investments are subject matte…

Medall Scans and Labs Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO Corporate Ward 4(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes in the manner indicated above

Bench: Shri Ramit Kochar & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddyआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 2337/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2015-16 M/S. Medall Scans & Labs Pvt. Ltd., The Income Tax Officer, No. 67, 2Nd Floor, Tnpl Building, Mount Vs. Corporate Ward 4(1), Road, Guindy, Chennai 600 032. Chennai. [Pan:Aahcm2252J] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri T. Vasudevan, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Guru Bashyam, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 26.11.2019 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.11.2019 आदेश /O R D E R Per Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

…Hon’ble Madras High Court decision in case of Chettinad Logsitics Private Limited (supra) has been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is also relevant here to mention decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Redington (India) Limited v. Addl. CIT 392 ITR 633, wherein, similar view was taken and in fact, the Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Chettinad Logistics Private Limited (supra) relied upon this decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Redington India Limited (supra) to hold and decide the issue in favour of the assessee. Thus, keeping in view decision of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Hi…

Unipres India Pvt. Ltd., Kancheepuram vs. ITO, Corporate Ward - 3 (2), Chennai

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar"नधा'रण वष' /Assessment Year: 2014-15

…h Court decision in case of Chettinad Logsitics Private Limited(supra) has been dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court. It is also relevant here to mention decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Redington(India) Limited v. Addl. CIT reported in (2017) 392 ITR 633(Mad.) wherein similar view is taken and infact Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Chettinad Logistics Private Limited(supra) relied upon this decision of Hon’ble Madras High Court in case of Redington India(supra) to hold and decide the issue in favour of tax-payer. The decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Limited v. C…

ACIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai vs. Rupa Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.994/Chny/2019 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2015-16 The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S Rupa Holdings Pvt. Ltd., No.827, 3Rd Floor, Dhun Building, Income Tax, V. Corporate Circle – 5(2), Anna Salai, Chennai - 600 002. Chennai - 600 034. Pan : Aaacr 3652 E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

…. Devanathan, the Ld.counsel for the assessee also. According to the Ld. counsel, the assessee has not earned exempted income, therefore, the CIT(Appeals) by placing reliance on the judgment of Madras High Court in Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633, allowed the claim of the assessee. 4. We have considered the rival submissions on either side and perused the relevant material available on record. The Assessing Officer specifically added the disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act while computing book profit under Section 115JB of the 3 I.T.A. No.994/Chny/19 Act. This Tribunal is…

Ashok Leyland Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Company Circle 1 (1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.748/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2011-12

…(A), the CIT(A) restricted the disallowance to the extent of exempt income and the decision of the 15 I.T.A. No.748/Chny/18 CIT(A) is no doubt in consonance with the law laid down by the Hon'ble Madras High Court in Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633. However, while computing the disallowance, only the amount of investments which yielded exempted income alone has to be considered. Therefore, we remit the matter back to the file of the A.O. to recompute the amount of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act considering only the investments which yielded exempted income. 25. In the result, th…