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 5, Cited by 1]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad

Creamline Dairy Projects Limited, ... vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax , ... on 6 May, 2021

        IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
         HYDERABAD BENCHES "B" : HYDERABAD
             (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE)

       BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
                         AND
     SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                    I.T.A. No. 937/HYD/2018
                    Assessment Year: 2014-15

     Creamline Dairy              The Deputy Commissioner
     Projects Limited,         Vs of Income Tax,
     HYDERABAD                    Circle-1(2),
     [PAN: AABCC6780D]            HYDERABAD
          (Appellant)                        (Respondent)

           For Assessee     : Shri K.C.Devdas, AR
           For Revenue      : Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR

            Date of Hearing              :   09-02-2021
            Date of Pronouncement        :   06-05-2021
                             ORDER

PER S.S. GODARAA, JM :

This assessee's appeal for AY.2014-15 arises from the CIT(A)-1, Hyderabad's order dated 18-12-2017 passed in case No.0227/CIT(A)-1/Hyd/2016-17/2017-18, in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, 'the Act'].

Heard both the parties. Case file perused.

2. The assessee has raised the following substantive grounds in the instant appeal:

"2. The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have observed that the assessing officer erred in arriving at the conclusion that the expenditure incurred would come into the ambit of provisions of section 14A of the I.T.Act.
:- 2 -:
ITA No. 937/Hyd/2018
3. The Ld.CIT(A) ought to have directed the assessing officer that in the facts and circumstances of the case there was no scope for applying provisions of section 14A and disallow expenditure of Rs.14,90,000/-
4. The ld.CIT(A) ought to have observed that the assessing officer erred in working out the disallowance at Rs.14,90,000/- by invoking provisions of section 14A and therefore, the same liable to be deleted."

3. At the outset, learned authorised representative submitted that there is no dividend income earned in the relevant previous year. In this connection, he relied on the following case law:

i. CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., [80 taxmann.com 221] (Madras);
ii. CIT Vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd., [223 Taxman 130] (Guj); iii. Cheminvest Ltd., Vs. CIT (2015) [378 ITR 33] (Del) Their lordships hold that Section 14A read with Rule 8D applies only in relation to an assessee's exempt income and not otherwise. We therefore delete the impugned disallowance.

4. This assessee's appeal is allowed in above terms.

Order pronounced in the open court on 06 th May, 2021 Sd/- Sd/-

(LAXMI PRASAD SAHU)                                 (S.S.GODARA)
ACCOUNTANT MEMBER                                 JUDICIAL MEMBER
Hyderabad,
Dated: 06-05-2021
                             :- 3 -:
                                                 ITA No. 937/Hyd/2018




*gmv




Copy to :

1.Creamline Dairy Projects Limited, C/o B.Narsing Rao & Co., Chartered Accountants, Plot no.554, Road no.92, Jubilee Hills, Hyderabad. - 500 096

2.The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad.

3.CIT(Appeals)-1, Hyderabad.

4.Pr.CIT-1, Hyderabad.

5.D.R. ITAT, Hyderabad.

6.Guard File.