Delhi HC: Woman's Right to a Shared Household Does Not Allow Indefinite Occupation of In-Laws' Home  ||  Delhi HC: Director Disputes in a Company Do Not Qualify as Genuine Hardship to Delay ITR Filing  ||  Delhi HC: ECI Cannot Resolve Internal Disputes of Unrecognised Parties; Civil Court Must Decide  ||  Bombay High Court: Senior Citizens Act Cannot be Misused to Summarily Evict a Son  ||  Chhattisgarh HC: Service Tax Refund Can't Be Denied on Limitation When Payment Was Made During Probe  ||  Supreme Court: If Tribunal Ends Case For Unpaid Fees, Parties Must Seek Recall Before Using S.14(2)  ||  SC: Article 226 Writs Jurisdiction Cannot be Used to Challenge Economic or Fiscal Reforms  ||  Supreme Court: Hostile Witness Testimony Can't Be Discarded; Consistent Parts Remain Valid  ||  Supreme Court: GPF Nomination in Favour of a Parent Becomes Invalid Once the Employee Marries  ||  Supreme Court: Candidate Not Disqualified if Core Subject Studied Without Exact Degree Title    

Shri Jasvantbhai R Patel vs. Principal Commissioner of Income - (Income Tax Appellate Tribunal) (17 Mar 2023)

Disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of IT Act cannot exceed amount of exempted income

MANU/IB/0094/2023

Direct Taxation

The assessee filed its return of income for assessment year 2015-16 declaring total income of 50,49,400. The case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny through CASS and assessment was completed under Section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (IT Act) assessing the total income at 51,45,844 after making disallowance under Section 14A of 96,444. The PCIT observed that, the assessee had claimed exempt dividend income of 360 and the assessee had claimed interest expenditure of 17.53 lakhs. In the assessment order, the AO made disallowance under Section 14A of 96,444 on account of administrative expenses.

However, as per the PCIT, while computing the disallowance under Section 14A, the element of interest expenses was not taken into consideration by the AO. According to the PCIT, after considering the interest expenses, amount disallowable under Section 14A read with Rule 8D would come to 5,38,799. Therefore, the PCIT held that, total expenditure of 5,38,799 under Section 14A read with Rule 8D was required to be disallowed as against disallowance of 96,444 made in the assessment order.

It is a well-settled principle that, expenditure to be disallowed under Section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income claimed by the assessee in the return of income. In the case of DCIT v. Edelweiss Financial Advisors Ltd., the Ahmedabad ITAT held that disallowance of expenses under section 14A read with Rule 8D could not exceed amount of exempted income.

In the instant set of facts, the assessing Officer disallowed a sum of 96,444 against exempt income of 360 claimed by the assessee in the return of income. Therefore, the assessing Officer has already disallowed a sum higher than the amount of exempt income under section 14A of the Act. Further, issue of disallowance of expenditure under section 14A with respect to exempt dividend income was examined during the course of assessment proceedings, and after considering the submissions of the assessee placed before him during the course of assessment proceedings, he disallowed the sum of 96,444 on account of administrative expenses.

Accordingly, there is no infirmity in the order of the Assessing Officer in the instant set of facts. Therefore, the order passed by the learned PCIT under Section 263 of the Act is liable to be set aside in the instant set of facts. Appeal of the assessee is allowed.

Tags : ASSESSMENT   EXPENDITURE   DISALLOWANCE  

Share :        

Disclaimer | Copyright 2025 - All Rights Reserved