Facts of the
Case
The Revenue filed an appeal under Section 260A of
the Income Tax Act, 1961, challenging the order dated 02.01.2024 passed by the
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal for Assessment Year 2016-17. The Tribunal had
affirmed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which deleted a
disallowance of ₹6,13,17,433/- made under Section 14A of the Act.
The assessee had filed its return declaring a loss,
which was later revised. During scrutiny, the Assessing Officer made various
additions, including disallowance under Section 14A on the assumption that the
assessee’s investments were capable of yielding exempt income.
Issues
Involved
- Whether disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act can be
made in a year where no exempt income has been earned.
- Whether the ITAT was justified in deleting the disallowance made
under Section 14A.
- Whether the Explanation to Section 14A inserted by the Finance Act,
2022 applies retrospectively.
- Whether any substantial question of law arose for consideration
under Section 260A.
Petitioner’s
(Revenue’s) Arguments
- The provisions of Section 14A are clear and mandate disallowance of
expenditure incurred in relation to investments capable of yielding exempt
income, even if no exempt income is earned in the relevant year.
- The ITAT erred in deleting the disallowance of ₹6.13 crore made by
the Assessing Officer.
- The Explanation inserted to Section 14A by the Finance Act, 2022
clarifies the legislative intent and supports the Revenue’s position.
Respondent’s
(Assessee’s) Arguments
- No part of the assessee’s income for AY 2016-17 was exempt from
tax.
- In absence of exempt income, Section 14A has no application.
- The issue is squarely covered by binding precedents of the Delhi
High Court.
- The Explanation to Section 14A introduced by the Finance Act, 2022
is prospective and cannot be applied to earlier assessment years.
Court Order
/ Findings
- The High Court held that disallowance under Section 14A cannot be
made where the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the
relevant assessment year.
- The issue was held to be conclusively covered by the decision in Cheminvest
Ltd. v. CIT, as well as subsequent judgments including PCIT v.
Alchemist Ltd.
- The Court rejected the Revenue’s reliance on the Explanation to
Section 14A inserted by the Finance Act, 2022, holding that the amendment
operates prospectively.
- Even otherwise, the Explanation had no application on facts, as
there was no allegation of expenditure incurred for earning exempt income
in future years.
Important
Clarification
The Court clarified that:
- The Explanation to Section 14A introduced by the Finance Act, 2022
does not have retrospective effect.
- For years prior to the amendment, the settled legal position
remains that Section 14A disallowance is impermissible in absence of
exempt income.
Final
Outcome
The appeal filed by the Revenue was dismissed. The
Delhi High Court upheld the deletion of disallowance under Section 14A and held
that no substantial question of law arose for consideration under Section 260A
of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Link to download the order - https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1770115334_THEPR.COMMISSIONEROFINCOMETAXCENTRAL1VsSAHARAINDIAFINANCIALCORPORATIONLTD..pdf
Disclaimer
This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.
0 Comments
Leave a Comment