2016 (5) TMI 1337 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance under section 14A - Held that - Assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year. As when there is no exempt income, which do not form part of total income, AO cannot disallow the expenditure u/s 14A of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of preliminary expenditure claimed by the assessee.
2. Disallowance of interest attributed to investments made in subsidiaries under section 14A of the Act.
3. Appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) - 12, Hyderabad for AY 2011-12.

Issue 1: Disallowance of Preliminary Expenditure
The Assessing Officer (AO) noted that the assessee had claimed a deduction of &8377; 42,26,322/- in the computation of income as against the allowable deduction u/s 35D of &8377; 3,23,261/-. Consequently, the AO added the difference amount of &8377; 39,03,061/- to the total income of the assessee as excess claimed. The CIT(A) confirmed this disallowance following the appellate order for AY 2010-11.

Issue 2: Disallowance of Interest under Section 14A
The AO disallowed an amount of &8377; 18,83,08,080/- under section 14A of the Act, as the interest attributed to investments made in subsidiaries was not eligible for deduction. The assessee argued that the interest expense on borrowed capital for investing in subsidiaries is an allowable expense, citing a Supreme Court judgment. However, the CIT(A) observed that the assessee failed to establish the manner in which the investment in subsidiaries would promote its business and serve its commercial purpose. Consequently, the CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance made by the AO.

Issue 3: Appeal Against CIT(A) Order
The assessee appealed against the order of the CIT(A) before the Appellate Tribunal. The assessee contended that the provisions of Section 14A should not apply as it had not earned any exempt income during the year. The Tribunal, considering various judgments, including those of different High Courts, held that unless an assessee has earned exempt income in a particular financial year, the provisions of section 14A will not apply. Therefore, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and allowed the grounds raised by the assessee. As a result, the appeal of the assessee was partly allowed, and Ground No. 2, which was not pressed, was dismissed.

This detailed analysis of the legal judgment covers the issues of disallowance of preliminary expenditure, disallowance of interest under section 14A, and the appeal against the CIT(A) order, providing a comprehensive understanding of the case and its outcomes.