2018 (12) TMI 1392 - HC - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 14A - expenses attributable to exempt income - Non recording of satisfaction - Held that - Assessment order is silent and does not examine and discuss the relevant facts relating to disallowance under Section 14A. The order proceeds to compute disallowance under clause (ii) of Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules 1962 without recording necessary satisfaction under Section 14A of the Act. The Assessing Officer had erroneously assumed that Rule 8D applies to all cases of exempt income without examining and deciding whether or not the deduction or disallowance if any made by the assessee was satisfactory and proper Disallowance made by the Assessing Officer by simply invoking clause (ii) to Rule 8D without recording any satisfaction in terms of Section 14A would not be in accordance with and as per the terms of the statute. - decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Failure to file profit and loss account and balance sheet by appellant-Revenue.
2. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 without proper examination and satisfaction.

Issue 1: Failure to file profit and loss account and balance sheet by appellant-Revenue:
The appellant-Revenue was directed to submit the profit and loss account and balance sheet within a specified period, but failed to comply. Despite claims of having filed two pages, these were deemed unhelpful due to the inadequacy of the assessment order provided. The assessment order lacked a detailed examination of relevant facts, specifically regarding disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The order proceeded to compute disallowance without recording necessary satisfaction under Section 14A, leading to errors in application. The Assessing Officer mistakenly assumed Rule 8D applied universally to exempt income cases without assessing the adequacy of deductions made by the assessee. The Supreme Court precedent in Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited v. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax emphasized the requirement for satisfaction by the assessing officer before invoking Rule 8D, which was absent in this case.

Issue 2: Disallowance under Section 14A without proper examination and satisfaction:
The assessment order failed to examine and discuss relevant facts concerning disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. It proceeded to calculate disallowance under Rule 8D without the necessary satisfaction under Section 14A. The order did not consider whether the deductions or disallowances made by the assessee were satisfactory and proper. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal correctly held that the disallowance made without recording satisfaction under Section 14A was not in accordance with statutory requirements. The judgment emphasized the need for the assessing officer to be satisfied with the claim of the assessee before applying Rule 8D or making a best judgment determination. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed as it did not raise a substantial question of law, with no costs imposed.

This comprehensive analysis of the legal judgment highlights the issues of failure to file necessary documents by the appellant-Revenue and the incorrect application of disallowance under Section 14A without proper examination and satisfaction, as discussed in the Delhi High Court judgment.