2023 (3) TMI 1228 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - AR contended that for working out of disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.r 8D, AO has considered total average investments instead of average investments which have yielded dividend income - HELD THAT - We find that in the case of Cargo Motors (P) Ltd. 2022 (10) TMI 571 - DELHI HIGH COURT have held that for the purpose of making disallowance of expenses u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D only those investments are to be considered for computing average value of investments which have yielded exempt income during the relevant year. Before us, Revenue has not placed on record any contrary binding decision. We further find that there is no finding of the lower authorities on the investments which have yielded exempt income. Disallowance u/s. 14A needs to be reworked by the AO, in view of the decision of Cargo Motors (P) Ltd. (supra).This ground of assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
The issues involved in the judgment are related to the assessment of income, disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, invocation of Rule 8D, and imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c).

Assessment of Income:
The appellant, a company engaged in investment activities, filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2013-14 declaring NIL taxable income. However, the assessing officer determined the total income at Rs. 83,88,530, which was challenged by the appellant before the CIT(A) who granted partial relief. The appellant further appealed against the CIT(A)'s order on various grounds, including the legality and jurisdiction of the additions made. The appellant contended that the assessing officer erred in assessing income at a higher amount than the returned income.

Disallowance under Section 14A and Rule 8D:
The assessing officer, during the assessment proceedings, noticed that the appellant had investments in equity shares and earned dividend income. The appellant had suo moto disallowed a certain amount under section 14A of the Act. However, the assessing officer, invoking Rule 8D, worked out a total disallowance under section 14A at a higher amount. The CIT(A) upheld the assessing officer's order, leading the appellant to appeal before the Tribunal. The appellant challenged the disallowance under Rule 8D, arguing that only investments yielding exempt income should be considered for computing the disallowance. The Tribunal, considering the appellant's contentions and relevant legal precedents, directed the assessing officer to rework the disallowance in accordance with the law and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court.

Imposition of Penalty and Interest:
The appellant also raised issues regarding the imposition of penalty under section 271(1)(c) and interest charged under section 234B. The appellant contended that the penalty and interest charged were illegal, without jurisdiction, and excessive. However, the Tribunal's decision primarily focused on the disallowance under section 14A and Rule 8D, allowing the appeal partly for statistical purposes.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal partly, directing the assessing officer to rework the disallowance under section 14A in accordance with the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court. The Tribunal emphasized the need to consider only investments yielding exempt income for computing the disallowance. The issues related to penalty and interest were not the primary focus of the Tribunal's decision, which primarily addressed the disallowance under section 14A and Rule 8D.