Need Tally
for Clients?

Contact Us! Here

  Tally Auditor

License (Renewal)
  Tally Gold

License Renewal

  Tally Silver

License Renewal
  Tally Silver

New Licence
  Tally Gold

New Licence
Open DEMAT Account with in 24 Hrs and start investing now!
From the Courts »
Open DEMAT Account in 24 hrs
 Inordinate delay in income tax appeal hearings
 Income Tax leviable on Tuition Fee in the Year of Rendering of Services: ITAT
 Supreme Court invoked its power under Article 142 of Constitution to validate notices issued under section 148 as notices issued under section 148A. However the same shall be subject to amended provisions of section 149.
 ITAT refuses to stay tax demand on former owner of Raw Pressery brand
 Bombay HC sets aside rejection of refund claims by GST authorities
 [Income Tax Act] Faceless Assessment Scheme does not take away right to personal hearing: Delhi High Court
 Rajasthan High Court directs GST Authority to Unblock Input Tax Credit availed in Electronic Credit Ledger
 Sebi-taxman fight over service tax dues reaches Supreme Court
 Delhi High Court Seeks Status Report from Centre for Appointments of Chairperson & Members in Adjudicating Authority Under PMLA
 Delhi High Court allows Income Tax Exemption to Charitable Society running Printing Press and uses Profit so generated for Charitable Purposes
 ITAT accepts Lease Income as Business Income as Business Investments were mostly in nature of Properties

Mayar India Ltd.,Plot No.A, Basant Lok Community Center, Vasant Vihar, New Delhi Vs. JCIT(OSD) Circle-6(1) C.R.Building, New Delhi
November, 27th 2014
                    DELHI BENCH "E": NEW DELHI

                              ITA No. 3280/Del/2013
                            (Assessment Year: 2008-09)

                Mayar India Ltd.,                JCIT(OSD)
                Plot No.A, Basant Lok            Circle-6(1)
                Community Center,          Vs.   C.R.Building,
                Vasant Vihar,                    New Delhi
                New Delhi
                (Appellant)                      (Respondent)

                   Appellant by    : Mahesh Kumar Bansal, CA
                 Respondent by     : J.P. Chandraker , Sr. DR



      This is an appeal arising from the order of the ld CIT(A), IX, New Delhi for
Assessment Year 2008-09.
2.    The solitary issue pertains to disallowance of Rs. 9,62,228/- u/s 14A of the
Income Tax Act, 1961 (herein after `the Act').
3.    Brief facts of the case is that the assessee company is engaged in the
business of manufacturing of herbal products and trading in various
commodities and providing services to Mayar (HK) Ltd., Honkong. The return
of income for the Assessment Year 2008-09 was filed by declaring an income
of Rs.71,04,370/-. The same was later selected for scrutiny processed u/s
143(3) of the Act and made an addition of Rs.81,90,600/-.
4.    The AO invoked Section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D and
computed disallowance at 5% of average investments i.e. 5% of Rs.19.25
crores and computed disallowance at Rs.9,62,228/- which has been
confirmed by the ld CIT(A). Having considered the submission and evidences
placed on record we find that the undisputed facts as emerging from the
material on record is that the assessee did not earn any exempt income in
                                                                         Page 2 of 3

the instant year. In such circumstances the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court
has held in the case of ld CIT Vs. Hokim India Pvt Ltd. In ITA No.486/2014 as
      "14. On the issue whether the respondent-assessee could have
      earned dividend income and even if no dividend income was earned,
      yet Section 14A can be invoked and disallowance of expenditure can
      be made, there are three decisions of the different High Courts directly
      on the issue and against the appellant-Revenue. No contrary decision
      of a High Court has been shown to us. The Punjab and Haryana High
      Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad Vs. M/s. Lakhani
      Marketing Incl., ITA No. 970/2008, decided on 02.04.2014, made
      reference to two earlier decisions of the same Court in CIT Vs. Hero
      Cycles Limited, [2010] 323 ITR 518 and CIT Vs. Winsome Textile Industries
      Limited, [2009] 3 19 ITR 204 to hold that Section 14A cannot be invoked
      when no exempt income was earned. The second decision is of the
      Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs. Corrtech
      Energy (P.) Ltd. [2014] 223 Taxmann 130 (Guj.). The third decision is of
      the Allahabad High Court in Income Tax Appeal No. 88 of 2014.
      Commissioner of Income Tax (II) Kanpur, Vs. M/s. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd.
      decided on 05.05.2014. In the said decision it has been held:

            "As regards the second question, Section 14A of the Act provides
            that for the purposes of computing the total income under the
            Chapter, no deduction shall be allowed in respect of
            expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which
            does not form part of the total income under the Act. Hence,
            what Section 14A provides is that if there is any income which
            does not form part of the income under the Act, the expenditure
            which is incurred for earning the income is not an allowable
            deduction. For the year in question, the finding of fact is that the
            assessee had not earned any tax Fee income. Hence, in the
            absence of any lax Fee income, the corresponding expenditure
            could not be worked out for disallowance. The view of the
            C1T(A) , which has been affirmed by the Tribunal, hence does
            not give rise to any substantial question of law. Hence, the
            deletion of the disallowance of Rs.2,03,752/- made by the
            Assessing Officer was in order".

      15.   Income exempt under Section 1 0 in a particular assessment
      year, may not have been exempt earlier and can become taxable in
      future years. Further, whether income earned in a subsequent year
      would or would not be taxable, may depend upon the nature of
      transaction entered into in the subsequent assessment year. For
      example, long term capital gain on sale of shares is presently not
      taxable where security transaction tax has been paid, but a private
      sale of shares in an off market transaction attracts capital gains tax. It is
                                                                         Page 3 of 3

        an undisputed position that respondent assessee is an investment
        company and had invested by purchasing a substantial number of
        shares and thereby securing right to management. Possibility of sale of
        shares by private placement etc. cannot be ruled out and is not an
        improbability. Dividend mayor may not be declared. Dividend is
        declared by the company and strictly in legal sense, a shareholder has
        no control and cannot insist on payment of dividend. When declared,
        it is subjected to dividend distribution tax."

5.      Having regard to the aforesaid factual and judicial position we hold
that disallowance made u/s 14A is unwarranted and therefore we delete the
addition of Rs.9,62,228/-.
6.      In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed.

        Order pronounced in the open court on 21.11.2014.

              -Sd/-                                                  -Sd/-
        (S.V. MEHROTRA)                                          (A. T. VARKEY)
      ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                        JUDICIAL MEMBER
A K Keot

Copy forwarded to
     1. Applicant
     2. Respondent
     3. CIT
     4. CIT (A)
     5. DR:ITAT
                                                          ASSISTANT REGISTRAR
                                                                 ITAT, New Delhi
Home | About Us | Terms and Conditions | Contact Us
Copyright 2023 CAinINDIA All Right Reserved.
Designed and Developed by Ritz Consulting