DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), CHENNAI V. Fullerton India Credit Company Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 2860/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1505 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 08-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: G S D BABU
• Section: 14A; 115JB

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' # , % #& BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2860/CHNY/2018 ) *) / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE 2(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. V. M/S FULLERTON INDIA CREDIT COMPANY LTD., MEGH TOWERS, 3 RD FLOOR, OLD NO.307, NEW NO.165, POONAMALLEE HIGH ROAD, MADURAVOYAL, CHENNAI - 600 095. PAN : AAACD 1707 C (,-/ APPELLANT) (./,-/ RESPONDENT) ,- 0 1 / APPELLANT BY : SHRI SRIDHAR DORA, JCIT ./,- 0 1 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI G.S.D. BABU, ADVOCATE 2 0 3% / DATE OF HEARING : 12.06.2019 45* 0 3% / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 14.06.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -6, CHENNA I, DATED 16.07.2018 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. HAVING HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS TH AT THE FIRST ISSUE 2 I.T.A. NO.2860/CHNY/18 ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DISALLOWANCE MADE BY TH E ASSESSING OFFICER WITH REGARD TO EXPENDITURE FOR EARNING THE EXEMPTED INCOME. THE CIT(APPEALS) BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE JUDGMEN T OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN REDINGTON (INDIA) LTD. V. ADDL . CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633, RESTRICTED THE DISALLOWANCE TO THE EXTENT OF EXEMPTED INCOME. THE CONTENTION OF THE REVENUE BEFORE THIS TRIBUNAL IS THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN REDINGTON (INDIA) LTD. (SUPRA) HAS NOT ATTAINED FINALITY AND THE MATTER IS STILL PENDING BEFORE THE APEX COURT. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT MERE PENDENCY OF APPEAL IN APEX COURT CANNOT BE A R EASON FOR NOT FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH C OURT. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE MADRAS HIGH COURT IS STAYED BY THE APEX COURT. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUT HORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 3. ONE MORE ISSUE WAS RAISED BY THE REVENUE WITH RE GARD TO INCLUSION OF DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE INCOME- TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT 'THE ACT') WHILE COMPUTING BOOK PROFIT UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT. 3 I.T.A. NO.2860/CHNY/18 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS TH AT THE CIT(APPEALS) BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF TH IS TRIBUNAL IN BEACH MINERALS COMPANY (P) LTD. IN 64 TAXMANN.COM 2 18, FOUND THAT THE DISALLOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT CANNOT BE ADDED IN THE BOOK PROFIT UNDER SECTION 115JB OF THE ACT. SINCE THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS FOLLOWED THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNA L, WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF THE LOWER AUT HORITY AND ACCORDINGLY THE SAME IS CONFIRMED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 14 TH JUNE, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' # ) ( . . . ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 7 /DATED, THE 14 TH JUNE, 2019. KRI. 0 .389 :9*3 /COPY TO: 1. ,- /APPELLANT 2. ./,- /RESPONDENT 3. 2 ;3 () /CIT(A)-6, CHENNAI-34 4. PRINCIPAL CIT- 2, CHENNAI 5. 9< .3 /DR 6. =) > /GF.