TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (5) TMI 1946
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....filed condonation petition, which are as follows- "1. The Ld. CIT(A) has passed an order in Appeal NO. NFAC/2017-18/10041816 order dated 20.09.2023 through ITBA. 2. The order of the Ld. CIT(A) has neither been communicated to this stakeholder nor any alert on passing the order by the Ld. CIT(A) has been sent either through SMS or through e-mail or through any other mode by the Departmental system network to this stakeholder. 3. Orders of Ld. CIT(A)'s are downloaded from the Departmental system on manual checking basis. During the period from September, 2023 to November, 2023 this stakeholder was under pressure of disposing time barring matters. For this reason and due to non-availability of sufficient system resources, the searching....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... wherein the appeal of the assessee has been allowed on addition/s 68 of the Act and disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A of the Act. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied the revenue has preferred an appeal before us. 5. The ld. D.R challenges the very impugned order thereby submitting that the Ld. CIT(A) did not consider the case relying on the recently based the verdict of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT vs. NRA Iron & Steel Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 412 ITR 161 (SC) in which it has been held that if the enquiries and investigations reveals that identity of the creditors to be dubious or doubtful or lack of creditworthiness, then the genuineness of the transaction would not be established. The ld. Counsel further submits that in the present ca....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssed by the Ld. CIT(A) and find that the Ld. CIT(A) in its order has deleted the addition made u/s 14A of the Act, going over the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court. The operative portion of the order of Ld. CIT(A) is essential to reproduce herein below: "5. Grounds No. 1, 2 and 3 of the appeal are against the disallowance made by the AO u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D. No exempt income was earned by the appellant during the year under reference, therefore, as per appellant's version it has not made disallowance u/s 14A of the income tax Act. However, the Ld. AO made a disallowance of Rs. 18,79,636/- applying rule 8D and following CBDT circular dated 11 February 2014. The question as to whether disallowance u/s 14A can be made even i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D does not arise. 6. In the assessment order, the AO, while making disallowance has relied on the decision of Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Limited vs CIT [Civil Appeal No. 104-109 of 2015]. In the assessment order, the AO himself is stating that the fact in assessee's case and that of Supreme Court are not one and the same. In the case of Maxopp Investment Limited (supra) the Supreme Court observed that the action of the AO in the case of State Bank of Patiala ((2017] 391 ITR 218) restricting the disallowance of expenditure to the amount which was claimed as exempt income by applying Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D was reasonable. Following the decision of Supreme Court, in the case of app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... has rightly held in its order that making addition u/s 14A by applying the Rule 8D is not justified. 9. So far the next issue with regard to the addition of amount of Rs. 4,66,40,000/- u/s 68 of the Act is concerned we find that during the assessment proceedings, the copy of amount confirmation of relevant bank statement of M/s Dalmia Laminators Limited, confirmation letter from M/s Dalmia Laminators Limited confirming the transaction and proving the details of their source and fund had been provided to the AO. It is further pertinent to mention here that the assessee has opted loan of Rs. 4,66,40,000/- from M/s Dalmia Laminator Limited during the year under consideration, this was repaid in fully. The assessee has also provided a detaile....