Appeal details
Counselvise Citation
[2024] 129 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0146 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
Assessee PAN
Bench
Appeal Number
Duration Of Justice
5 month(s) 5 day(s)
Appellant
Respondent
Appeal Type
Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date
02-09-2024
Appeal Filed By
Department
Order Result
Dismissed
Bench Allotted
B
Next Hearing Date
27-08-2024
Assessment Year
2011-2012
Appeal Filed On
27-03-2024
Judgement Text
आयकर अपील
य अ धकरण,चडीगढ़ यायपीठ , चडीगढ़
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH
BENCH ‘B’ CHANDIGARH
BEFORE: SHRI A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT AND
SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 316/CHD/2024
नधारण वष / Assessment Year : 2011-12
The ITO,
Ward 5(5),
Chandigarh.
बनाम
VS
Jagan Industries Pvt. Ltd.,
SCF 18-19, Sector 28,
Chandigarh.
थायी लेखा सं./PAN /TAN No: AAACJ3694C
अपीलाथ/Appellant
यथ/Respondent
नधा रती क ओर से/Assessee by : None
राजव क ओर से/ Revenue by : Shri Danish Abdullah, JCIT, Sr.DR
तार"ख/Date of Hearing : 28.08.2024
उदघोषणा क तार"ख/Date of Pronouncement : 03.09.2024
PHYSICAL HEARING
आदेश/ORDER
PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT
This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order
of the Ld. CIT(A) NFAC, Delhi dated 30.01.2024 pertaining to
assessment year 2011-12, taking the following grounds :
1. The Ld. C1T(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs 27.72.68
without appreciating the facts of the case.
2. That the Ld. C1T(A) has erred in deleting the
disallowance of Rs.27,72,581/- u/s 144 of the Income Tax Action
the ground that disallowance cannot be made where there is no
exempt income without appreciating the fact that applicability of
section I4A or Rule SD does not depend on earning of income.
3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the legislative intent
expressed in clarificatory explanation inserted in section 14 as the
provisions of this section shall apply and shall be deemed to have
always applied in a case where the income, not forming part of the
ITA 316/CHD/2024
A.Y. 2011-12
2
total income under thus Act, has not accrued or arisen or has not
been received during the previous year relevant to an assessment
year and the expenditure has been incurred during the said previous
year in relation to such income not forming part of the total
income"
4. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in ignoring the legislative intent
expressed in CBDT’s Circular No.5/2024 dated 15.03.2024; which
explicitly state in 3.1 that where any under notification instruction
or circular of the Board of the Government has been held to be to
be illegal or ultra vires the Act or otherwise constitutionally
invalid.
5. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that disallowance
under Section 14A cannot be made where there is no exempt
income, when Supreme Court has upheld the principles of
appointment and department is in SLP on the same issue in the case of
Moderate Leasing and Capital Services Ltd. in ITA No. 102/2018, ?.?.
2000 10 and Mams Cellular Services (P) Ltd. in ITA No. 484/2017 and
S I P has also been approved against the decision o f Hon'ble Jurisdiction
High Court in the case of M/s Vardhman Chemtech Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No
322/2016.
6. The Ld. C1T( A ) has erred in restricting the disallowance the self
declared disallowance by the assessee without appreciating the fact that
the disallowance has to be worked out as per the provision of Rule 8D
specifically incorporated in the Income Tax Rules for this purpose.
7. It is prayed that the order of the Ld.CIT(A) be revoked and that o f the
assessing officer may be restored.”
2. None has put in appearance despite issuance of notice,
which has not returned unserved. However, finding that the
matter can be proceeded with in the absence of the assessee,
we have heard the ld. DR.
3. It is noted that the tax effect involved in the present
appeal is Rs. 8,56,758/-. Accordingly, in terms of the CBDT
Circular dated 08.08.2019 wherein the Department has
specified the monetary limit for an appeal to be filed by the
ITA 316/CHD/2024
A.Y. 2011-12
3
Revenue before the ITAT as Rs. 50 lacs, the appeal so filed
by the Revenue is not maintainable.
4. In view of the above facts and circumstances, the
present appeal filed by the Department is dismissed due to
low tax effect with a liberty to seek recall in case the matter
falls under any of the exceptions so carved out in the
aforesaid circular.
5. It is, however, clarified that the dismissal of the above
appeal shall not be taken to be affirmation of the order of the
CIT(A) on merits. The legal issue raised by the Revenue is
being left open to be adjudicated in an appropriate case.
6. In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced on 03.09.2024.
Sd/- Sd/-
(VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) (A.D.JAIN )
ACCOUNTANTMEMBER VICE PRESIDENT
“Poonam”
आदेश क琉 灹ितिलिप अ灡ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to :
1. अपीलाथ牸/ The Appellant
2. 灹瀄यथ牸/ The Respondent
3. आयकर आयु猴/ CIT
4. िवभागीय 灹ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च瀃डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH
5.
गाड榁 फाईल/ Guard File
आदेशानुसार/ By order,
सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar
Mehul