2019 (2) TMI 1412 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - sourcing of investment from borrowed funds or own funds - investment is taken as stock-in-trade of shares - ex-parte order - HELD THAT - CIT(A) had rightly appreciated the facts of the present case to the effect that the assessee had made investment in exempt income earning avenues and earned dividend income during the year, but not made any disallowance by invoking rule 8D. From the records of balance sheet, the assessee s own funds as on 31.03.12 were only ₹ 1.47 crores against the investment of ₹ 48.07 crores. The short term borrowings stands at ₹ 44.43 crores and thus after appreciating the documents, CIT(A) rightly appreciated that the investment was not sourced by the assessee from own funds, but was sourced from borrowed funds. Moreover, no new facts have been brought on record before us in order to controvert or rebut the findings so recorded by CIT (A). Therefore, the findings of the revenue authorities were un-rebutted and thus there are no reasons for us to interfere into or deviate from the findings recorded by the CIT (A). - Decided against assessee.

Summary

Issues:
- Delay in filing the appeal
- Ex-parte hearing due to non-appearance of the assessee
- Disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Act

Delay in Filing the Appeal:
The appeal filed by the assessee was delayed by 3 days. The Tribunal, considering the smallness of the delay, condoned it based on principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. The appeal was admitted for deciding on merits.

Ex-Parte Hearing Due to Non-Appearance of the Assessee:
Despite multiple calls and notices, nobody appeared on behalf of the assessee during the proceedings. The Postal Authority reported that the assessee had refused to accept the notice. The Tribunal proceeded with an ex-parte hearing with the assistance of the Departmental Representative (DR) as the assessee did not attend.

Disallowance under Section 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Act:
The primary ground raised by the assessee challenged the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in confirming the disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D of the Act. The Tribunal examined the facts, balance sheet details, and the orders of the revenue authorities. The Commissioner had correctly appreciated that the assessee had made investments in exempt income avenues using borrowed funds. The Tribunal found no new evidence to rebut the Commissioner's findings. Consequently, the Tribunal upheld the order, dismissing the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee based on the issues of delay in filing, ex-parte hearing due to non-appearance, and the disallowance under section 14A r.w.r. 8D of the Act. The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner's order, finding no infirmity in the decision.