2019 (2) TMI 1072 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s. 14A - no exempt income during the relevant assessment year - Held that - We find that this issue is covered in favour of assessee. The Hon ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. in (2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT) and Redington (India)Ltd., Vs. Addl. CIT 2017 (1) TMI 318 - MADRAS HIGH COURT have held that the disallowance u/s. 14A cannot be made where there is no exempt income during the relevant assessment year. Therefore, we set aside the order of CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition made by him. Since there is no dividend in come earned from the investments, no disallowance u/s.14A is called for. Therefore, the disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.Rule 8D(iii) is deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.

Summary

Issues:
1. Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act.
2. Non-appearance of the assessee during appeal proceedings.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act
The case involved the disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act related to investments made by the assessee company in M/s. Sunway Mak International Private Limited. The Assessing Officer issued a show cause notice to the assessee regarding the applicability of section 14A, as no expenditure was claimed in relation to the investments made. The assessee contended that no increase in investments occurred during the year, and no part of the investment was made from borrowed funds, thus disallowance under section 14A was not justified. However, the Assessing Officer made disallowance under Rule 8D(ii) and 8D(iii). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee without deciding on the merits, as no one appeared for the assessee during the proceedings. The assessee then appealed to the Appellate Tribunal.

Issue 2: Non-appearance of the assessee during appeal proceedings
The Appellate Tribunal noted that the issue of disallowance under section 14A was covered in favor of the assessee by previous judgments of the Delhi High Court and Madras High Court, which held that disallowance under section 14A cannot be made if there is no exempt income during the relevant assessment year. As there was no dividend income earned from the investments, the Appellate Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition made under section 14A. Consequently, the disallowance under section 14A was deleted, and the appeal of the assessee was allowed.

In conclusion, the Appellate Tribunal ruled in favor of the assessee, directing the deletion of the disallowance made under section 14A of the Income Tax Act due to the absence of exempt income from the investments. The decision was based on previous judgments highlighting the principle that disallowance under section 14A cannot be imposed in the absence of exempt income.