Manindra Mohan Mazumdar, Burdhaman V. ACIT, Cir.-1, Asansol

ITA 414/KOL/2020

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9333 (ITAT-KOLKATA)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 18-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 01-07-2020
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANISH KANOJIA
• Keywords: Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 14A; 250

Judgement Text

। आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ᭠यायपीठ, कोलकाता । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, KOLKATA BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 414/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Manindra Mohan Mazumdar 18, Radhanagar Road Burnpur Dist:- Paschim Bardhaman Pin - 713325 PAN : AELPM0074R Vs Assistant Commissioner (I.T.), Circle-1, Asansol अपीलाथᱮ/ (Appellant) ᮧ᭜ यथᱮ/ (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Manish Kanojia, CIT सुनवाई कᳱ तारीख/Date of Hearing : 19/09/2022 घोषणा कᳱ तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 31/10/2022 आदेश/O R D E R PER SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - Asansol (hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”) dt. 13/01/2020, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act’), for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. These assessee’s appeal is time barred by 99 days and the petition seeking condonation of delay has been filed stating that the delay in filing of this appeal was attributable to the restrictions imposed due to Covid-19 pandemic. We have heard both the sides and find that there is reasonable cause for delay in filing of the appeal on time. Hence we condone the delay and admit the appeal for hearing. 3. Only grievance of the assessee in this appeal is that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of proportionate disallowance of interest u/s 14A of the Act at Rs.3,86,942/- without considering the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Hon’ble Tribunal in the assessee’s own case in ITA No. 2201/Kol/2014, order dt. 23/05/2018. When the case was called for hearing none appeared in person or through its authorised representative. The ld. D/R vehemently argued supporting the order of both the lower authorities. I.T.A. No. 414/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Manindra Mohan Mazumdar 2 3. We have heard the ld. D/R and perused the record. 4. The only issue under challenge is disallowance of interest expenditure of Rs.3,86,942/- made by the Assessing Officer u/s 14A of the Act. The assessee has contented that the case of the assessee is squarely covered by the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case for Assessment Year 2009-10 in ITA No. 2201/Kol/2014 order dt. 23/05/2018. Perusal of the order of this Tribunal we find that there was a similar issue of disallowance of interest of expenditure of Rs.1,71,253/- under Rule 8D(2)(ii) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“Rules”). However, since against the interest expenditure of Rs.3,14,456/-, there was interest income of Rs.55,68,925/- and also since there was a net interest income of Rs.52,54,469/-, the disallowance made for interest expenditure u/s 14A of the Act was deleted. However, examining the facts of the instant case, in the light of the above case, we find that the assessee has miserably failed to file the details of interest debited during the year and interest credited during the year and also no details is filed to show that at the end of the year, the assessee had net interest income. Even before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee cited the same decision of this Tribunal and the ld. CIT(A) has duly considered the same but since for the year under appeal i.e., Assessment Year 2013-14, appellant has not been able to show that after setting off of the interest income the interest income has resulted into net interest income. Before us also, except filing the copy of the decision of the Tribunal dt. 23/05/2018 (supra), no other evidence has been put forth. Under these circumstances, we find it difficult to grant any relief to the assessee. We, therefore, uphold the finding of the ld. CIT(A) and dismiss the sole ground raised by the assessee. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Court on 31 st October, 2022 at Kolkata. Sd/- Sd/- (SANJAY GARG) (MANISH BORAD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated 31/10/2022 *SC SrPs I.T.A. No. 414/Kol/2020 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Manindra Mohan Mazumdar 3 आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयुᲦ / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयुᲦ)अपील (/ The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, 6. गाडᭅ फाईल /Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ITAT, Kolkata