ITAT rules no Section 14A disallowance on stock-in-trade investments, refunds adjusted against interest first

The ITAT Mumbai ruled in favor of the assessee on two issues. First, regarding Section 14A disallowance, the tribunal held that when investments are held as stock-in-trade, no disallowance under Section 14A can be made, following the precedent set in PCIT vs. Punjab National Bank case. Second, on refund adjustment, the tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision that refunds must be adjusted first against interest payments to the assessee before adjusting against taxes, based on established judicial precedents.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Calculation of interest under Section 244A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Summary:

Issue 1: Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D

The learned Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed Rs. 18,07,69,806 under Section 14A read with Rule 8D, arguing that the assessee, a bank, held securities as stock-in-trade, thus disallowance under Section 14A was warranted. The CIT (A) partly agreed with the AO but restricted the disallowance to Rs. 5,92,74,298, citing that the bank had sufficient interest-free funds. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, referencing the co-ordinate Bench's decision in the assessee's own case for A.Y. 2012-13 and the Supreme Court's ruling in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT, which clarified that shares held as stock-in-trade by banks do not attract disallowance under Section 14A. Therefore, the Tribunal dismissed the AO's appeal and allowed the assessee's appeal.

Issue 2: Calculation of Interest under Section 244A

The assessee contended that interest under Section 244A was not correctly calculated on the refund. The CIT (A) agreed, directing that the refund should first be adjusted towards interest payable to the assessee and then towards tax. The Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s order, noting that the CIT (A) relied on several judicial precedents and no contrary decisions were presented by the Revenue. Consequently, the Tribunal dismissed the AO's appeal on this ground as well.

Conclusion:

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal of the learned Assessing Officer and allowed the appeal of the assessee, confirming that no disallowance under Section 14A is warranted for shares held as stock-in-trade and that the refund should be adjusted first towards interest payable to the assessee.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21.12.2023.

---