INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUMBAI V. SCRIPT STORIES MEDIA PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 2183/MUM/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0782 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 22-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Appeal Filed On: 23-04-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Earning of tax free income; Rule 8D

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “G” BENCH : MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.2183/Mum./2024 Assessment Year 2018-2019 The Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(2)(1), Room No.425, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai – 400 020 Maharashtra. vs. Script Stories Media Private Limited, Unit-1, Enterprise Centre, Nehru Road, Vile Parle East, Mumbai – 400 099 Maharashtra. PAN AATCS6380H (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Virabhadra Mahajan, Sr. DR For Assessee : -None- Date of Hearing : 23.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 24.07.2024 ORDER PER SATBEER SINGH GODARA, J.M. This assessee’s appeal, for assessment year 2018- 2019 arises against the order of the learned CIT(A)-National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi’s DIN & order no.ITBA/ NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1061441768(1), dated 24.02.2024, 2 ITA.No.2183/MUM./2024 in proceedings u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”). Case called twice. None appears at assessee’s behest. It is accordingly proceeded ex-parte. 2. Learned DR vehemently argued during the course of hearing that the CIT(A)-NFAC’s has erred in law and on facts in reversing the assessment findings making sec.14A r.w. Rule 8D disallowance of Rs.1,83,88,000/-. A perusal of the CIT(A)-NFAC’s detailed discussion reveals in this factual backdrop that he has deleted the impugned disallowance going by the clinching fact that the assessee had not derived any exempt income in the relevant previous year. 3. Faced with this situation, we note case law PCIT vs. Ballapur Industries Ltd., [2017] 86 taxmann.com 5 (Bom.) has settled the issue in assessee’s favour that such disallowance provision itself does not apply in absence of any exempt income. This is indeed coupled with the fact that the legislature has amended sec.14A of the Act by way of inserting Explanation by the Finance Act, 2022 w.e.f. 3 ITA.No.2183/MUM./2024 01.04.2022 than making it applicable retrospectively. We note that we are in assessment year 2018-2019 only and we accordingly see no merit in the Revenue’s instant sole substantive grievance. The same stands declined in very terms. Ordered accordingly. 4. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open Court on 24.07.2024 Sd/- Sd/- [OMKARESHWAR CHIDARA] [SATBEER SINGH GODARA] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai, Dated 24 th July, 2024 VBP/- Copy to 1. The applicant 2. The respondent 3. The Pr. CIT, Mumbai concerned 4. D.R. ITAT, “G” Bench, Mumbai. 5. Guard File. //By Order// //True Copy // Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Mumbai Benches, Mumbai.