Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (6) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2024 (6) TMI 70 - AT - Income Tax


Issues Involved:
1. Addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Disallowance on account of salary/wages u/s 37.
3. Disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D.

Summary:

Issue 1: Addition u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961

The Assessing Officer (AO) made an addition of Rs. 1,83,05,853/- u/s 68 due to discrepancies between Form 26AS and the income reported in the return. The AO noted that the assessee failed to reconcile receipts from M/s Dharampal Satyapal Ltd. (DSL), which were claimed in different assessment years. The CIT(A) deleted the addition, holding that the amount of Rs. 1,83,08,508/- was already accounted for in AY 2013-14, and the discrepancy was due to DSL's error in carrying forward the balance. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, noting that the reconciliation was accurate and no contrary findings were presented.

Issue 2: Disallowance on account of salary/wages u/s 37

The AO disallowed Rs. 58,64,646/- on account of salary/wages, citing significant differences from previous years. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance after examining salary details, bank transfers, and employee registrations with PF/ESI authorities. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT(A)'s order, as the salary payments were verified and tallied with the bank statements and employee records.

Issue 3: Disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D

Both parties agreed that no exempt income was earned by the assessee. The Tribunal, referencing the Hon'ble Delhi High Court's decision in Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33, held that no disallowance is warranted in the absence of exempt income.

Conclusion:

The appeal of the Revenue was dismissed, and the order of the CIT(A) was upheld on all grounds.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates