2015 (12) TMI 197 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 14A - Held that - Commissioner (Appeals) has restricted the disallowance under section 14A to 0.5% of value of investments. The Tribunal has concurred with the above findings of fact recorded by the Commissioner (Appeals). Evidently, therefore, the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal is based upon concurrent findings of fact recorded by it upon appreciation of the material on record. On behalf of the revenue, nothing contrary has been brought to the notice of the court to dislodge the concurrent findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal. Under the circumstances, in the absence of any perversity in the findings of fact recorded by the Tribunal, it is not possible to state that the impugned order of the Tribunal gives rise to any question of law - Decided against revenue Disallowance of expenditure covered under section 40A(2)(a) - Held that - Having heard the learned counsel for the appellant, the court is of the view that the matter requires consideration. Hence, ADMIT. The following substantial question of law arises for consideration Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the disallowance of expenditure of ₹ 30,73,341/- covered under section 40A(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961?

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance of expenditure under section 14A of the Income Tax Act
2. Disallowance of expenditure covered under section 40A(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act

Issue 1: Disallowance of expenditure under section 14A of the Income Tax Act:
The appellant revenue challenged the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the disallowance of expenditure under section 14A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2007-08. The Assessing Officer disallowed an amount under rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, adding it back to the total income of the assessee. The Commissioner (Appeals) partly allowed the appeal by reducing the disallowance. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's decision, stating that no direct expenditure was incurred for earning the exempt income, and only indirect administrative expenses were involved. The disallowance was restricted to 0.5% of the value of investments, amounting to Rs. 42,423. The Tribunal's decision was based on concurrent findings of fact, and no perversity was found in the Tribunal's order, leading to the rejection of the proposed question (a).

Issue 2: Disallowance of expenditure covered under section 40A(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act:
The court admitted the consideration of the substantial question of law regarding the disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 30,73,341 covered under section 40A(2)(a) of the Income Tax Act. The court found that this matter required further examination, and hence, admitted it for consideration. The question raised for consideration was whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in upholding the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleting the disallowance of the said expenditure. This issue was left open for further deliberation and analysis by the court.