2018 (11) TMI 1415

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erning assessment years 2012-13 & 2013-14. 2. We shall first take Revenue's appeal in ITA No. 2039/Ahd/2016 concerning AY 2012-13. 3. The Revenue by its ground of appeal has impugned the action of the CIT(A) in deleting the disallowance made by the AO by invoking Section 14A of the Act. 4. When the matter was called for hearing, the leaned AR for the assessee straightway adverted our attention to the undisputable fact recorded by the AO in para 4.1.1 of its order that the investments made by the assessee company has not given rise to any exempt income concerning the assessment year. Notwithstanding such fact, the assessee voluntarily disallowed Rs. 98.03 Lakhs against the non existent tax free income. The AO however re-worked the disallo....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....erused the orders of the authorities below. The substantive question arises in the Revenue's appeal is to ascertain the correctness of the action of the CIT(A) in refusing to endorse the action of the AO for resorting to disallowance under s.14A of the Act. Two broad issues emerges in the context of the case; (i) whether the disallowance under s.14A is maintainable where admittedly no exempt income i.e. dividend was earned by the assessee in the relevant assessment year and (ii) whether the CIT(A) was justified in going beyond the return of income and remove the disallowance which the assessee itself has made while filing the return of income. In other words, whether the action of the CIT(A) in bringing down the income returned by the asses....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 372 ITR 692 (Delhi) wherein Hon'ble Delhi High Court has categorically ruled that disallowance under s.14A of the Act cannot exceed the amount of tax exempt income. Notably, the SLP filed against the decision of Hon'ble Madras High Court in Chettinad Logistics (supra) has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT vs. Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd. (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC). Hence, in conformity with the judicial precedents, we find substantial merit in the conclusion drawn by the CIT(A) which essentially holds that Section 14A of the Act can be triggered only if assessee seeks to square off expenditure against the income which does not form part of total income under the Act and Section 14A of the Act canno....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the authorities under the Act are required to ensure that only legitimate tax dues are collected. This is the view which flows from innumerable judgments including CIT vs. Shelly Products (2003) 261 ITR 367 (SC), S. R. Koshti vs. CIT (2005) 276 ITR 165 (Guj), Ester Industries vs. CIT (2009) 185 TAXMAN 266 (Delhi) and CIT vs. Pruthvi Brokers & Shareholders (P.) Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom). The essence of these decisions are that mere admission on the part of the assessee with respect to an addition/disallowance in its original return or in revised return would not ipso facto bar an assessee from claiming an expense or disputing an addition if it is otherwise permissible under law. It is thus well settled that if a particular income is not ....