Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 3, Cited by 0]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai

Ito Company Ward 5(4), Chennai vs Rai Ispat Pvt. Ltd., Chennai on 7 May, 2018

             आयकर अपील य अ धकरण, 'बी'  यायपीठ, चे नई
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, 'B' (SMC) BENCH : CHENNAI

                     ी अ ाहम पी. जॉज , लेखा सद य एवं
             ी ध$ु व%
                    ु आर.एल रे &डी,  या)यक सद य के सम+ ।
       [BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
          AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER]

               आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.2593/CHNY/2017.
              नधा रण वष  /Assessment year         :       2013-2014.
  Income Tax Officer,              Vs.       M/s. Rai Ispat Pvt. Ltd,
  Company Ward 5(4)                          6/13, North Avenue,
  Chennai.                                   Kesava Perumal puram,
                                             R.A. Puram, Chennai 600 042.

                                             [PAN AAACR 1743C]
  (अपीलाथ./Appellant)                        (/0यथ./Respondent)

  अपीलाथ  क  ओर से/ Appellant by         :     Shri. B. Sagadevan, IRS, JCIT.
    यथ  क  ओर से /Respondent by          :     None


  सन
   ु वाई क  तार ख/Date of Hearing                     :      04-05-2018
  घोषणा क  तार ख /Date of Pronouncement               :      07-05-2018


                                   आदे श / O R D E R

  PER ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

In this appeal filed by the Revenue, which is directed against an order dated 31.07.2017 of ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Chennai, it has taken altogether three grounds of which ground No.1 & 3 are general needing no specific adjudication.

2. Vide its ground No.2, grievance raised by the Department is on deletion of a disallowance made by the ld. Assessing Officer u/s.14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ''the Act'').

:- 2 -: ITA No.2593/ CHNY/2017

3. We have perused the orders and heard the contentions. What we find is that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had deleted the disallowance for a reason that assessee had not claimed any exempt income during the impugned assessment year. This has not been disputed by the ld. Departmental Representative. By virtue of the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Redington India Ltd vs. Addl. CIT, 392 ITR 623, we are of the opinion that ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was justified in deleting the disallowance made u/s.14A of the Act. Ground No.2 is dismissed.

4. In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed. Order pronounced on Monday, the 7th day of May, 2018, at Chennai.

                Sd/-                                           Sd/-
         (ध$ु व%
               ु आर.एल रे &डी)                           (अ ाहम पी. जॉज )
        (DUVVURU RL REDDY)                            (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE)
 या)यक सद य/JUDICIAL       MEMBER                 लेखा सद य /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
  चे#नई/Chennai
  $दनांक/Dated:7th May, 2018.
   KV
   आदे श क    त'ल(प अ)े(षत/Copy to:
   1. अपीलाथ /Appellant          3. आयकर आयु*त (अपील)/CIT(A)   5. (वभागीय   त न/ध/DR
   2.   यथ /Respondent           4. आयकर आयु*त/CIT              6. गाड  फाईल/GF