9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to the disallowance of expenses incurred to earn dividend income under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 1999-2000. Facts and Circumstances: The appellant, a non-banking finance company engaged in advancing loans and making investments, filed a return of loss for the assessment year 1999-2000. The Assessing Officer (AO) disallowed a significant amount of expenses claimed by the appellant, related to interest income, on the grounds that the excess interest paid over interest earned pertained to funds borrowed for investment yielding exempt dividend income. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) upheld the AO's decision, leading to the appellant's appeal before the Tribunal. Preliminary Objection Raised: During the appeal hearing, the appellant raised a preliminary objection regarding the applicability of section 14A. The appellant argued that the AO's inquiry for disallowance under section 14A during the assessment proceedings under section 143(3) violated the proviso introduced by the Finance Act of 2002. The appellant cited previous decisions to support their contention, while the Departmental Representative referred to a contrary view taken by the Division Bench of Ahmedabad in a similar case. Decision and Analysis: The Tribunal considered the rival submissions and analyzed previous decisions. It was noted that the AO's actions did not amount to reassessment or enhancement of assessment but were part of the assessment process under section 143(3) when section 14A was introduced. The Tribunal referred to a decision by the Ahmedabad Division Bench to support its conclusion that the proviso did not apply in the present case. The Tribunal also clarified that the proviso's restriction on reducing a refund already made applied in the context of section 154 of the Act. Merits of the Disallowance: Regarding the merits of the disallowance, the Tribunal referred to a Third Member decision that emphasized the need for actual proof of expenditure incurred in relation to earning tax-free income for disallowance under section 14A. Since the AO had made the disallowance based on estimation, the Tribunal decided to set aside the CIT(A)'s order and directed the AO to re-examine the issue in accordance with the Third Member decision. Conclusion: The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the appellant for statistical purposes, setting aside the CIT(A)'s order and restoring the issue to the AO for fresh consideration in line with the directions provided. The AO was instructed to give the appellant an opportunity to be heard before making a decision on the issue.
|
