9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1636X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isallowance can be made. As in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT [ 2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT ] has held that, In the absence of exempt income, disallowance u/s 14A of any amount was not permissible. So, we are of the considered view that since assessee has not earned any dividend income nor proved to have incurred any expenditure on the investment during the year under assessment, no disallowance can be made, hence disallowance - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 250/Del./2016 and ITA No.251/Del./2016 - - - Dated:- 29-11-2019 - Shri R.K. Panda, Accountant Member And Shri Kuldip Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri R.S. Ahuja, Advocate For the Revenue : Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... owing the orders of the jurisdictional High Court in this matter. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 That on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned ITO and the CIT{A} erred in : 1. Including ₹ 2,00,00,000 in the taxable income on account of bogus purchases although the same was not bogus and it was genuine purchases. 2. Upholding the Assessment addition of Rs. l,00,000/-u/s 14A inspite of the fact that the Assessment for the year had abated in terms of section ls3A no incriminating material was unearthed in the course of search seizure operations. 3. Disallowing ₹ 1,00,000 u/s 14A of Income Tax Act. 4. Disallowing u/s 14A without the Assessing Officer giving any finding in the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... up before the Tribunal by way of filing the present appeals. 4. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon and orders passed by the revenue authorities below in the light of the facts and circumstances of the case. GROUND NO. 1 IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 2010-11 5. Ground No.1 in AYs 2009-10 2010-11 is dismissed having not been pressed during the course of arguments. GROUNDS NO. 2, 3, 4 5 IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2009-10 2010-11 6. Ld. AR for the assessee contended that since no dividend has been earned by the assessee during the year under assessment, no disallowance can be made. 7. Ld. DR for the Revenue, on the othe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
