M/s. Rathi Steel and Power Ltd., New Delhi V. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

MA 527/DEL/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 104 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2778 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 2 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 18-09-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 08-09-2022
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 15-08-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Section: 14A; 72

Judgement Text

1 MA no. 527/Del/2018 & ITA no. 6483/Del/2013 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “D”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No. 527/Del/2018 ( In ITA No. 6483/DEL/2013) [Assessment Year: 2009-10] AND ITA No. 6483/DEL/2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s Rathi Steel and Power Ltd., 24-1A, Mohan Cooperative Industrial Estate Mathura Road, New Delhi-110044 PAN: AAACR1435K Vs Add. CIT, Range-15, New Delhi. APPLICANT RESPONDENT Assessee represented by: Sh. A.T. Panda, Adv. Department represented by: Sh. Kanav Bali, Sr. DR Date of hearing 09.09.2022 Date of pronouncement 19.09.2022 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: The captioned application being M.A. No. 527/Del/2018 was filed by the assessee to recall/rectify the order dated 19.02.2018 passed in ITA no. 6483/Del/2013, pertaining to the assessment year 2009-10. 2 MA no. 527/Del/2018 & ITA no. 6483/Del/2013 2. The limited contention of the assessee is that while deciding the appeal the Tribunal failed to adjudicate ground nos. 2 & 2.1, which read as under: “2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 6,44,977/- to the book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. 2.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in not appreciating that no adjustment u/s 115JA/115JB of the Act could have been made because no expenditure was incurred to earn exempt income.” 3. After considering rival submissions and perusing the material on record we are of the view that there is a mistake apparent in the order dated 19.02.2018, as, ground nos. 2 & 2.1 raised by the assessee remained un-adjudicated. 4. As could been seen, the issue raised in these grounds relates to disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D while computing book profit u/s 115JA/115JB of the Act. Now, it is fairly well-settled that while computing book profit u/s 115JA/115JB of the Act, no disallowance with reference to Section 14A can be made. In this context, we may refer to the decision of the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Sobha Developers Ltd. Vs. DCIT [2021] 125 taxmann.com 72 (Kar.). In fact in case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. [2017] 82 taxmann.com 415 (Del.) the Special Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi has expressed identical view. Thus, we direct the Assessing officer not to make any disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D while computing book profit 3 MA no. 527/Del/2018 & ITA no. 6483/Del/2013 u/s 115JA/115JB of the Act. Thus, ground nos. 2 & 2.1 raised in ITA no. 6483/Del/2013 are allowed. 5. Thus, the order dated 19.02.2018 in ITA no. 6483/Del/2013 is recalled for the limited extent of deciding ground nos. 2 & 2.1 and the appeal is disposed of accordingly. 6. In the result, both, misc. application and the corresponding appeal are allowed, as indicated above. Order pronounced in open court on 19.09.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (ANIL CHATURVEDI ) (SAKTIJIT DEY) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER *MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI