Subscribe To Our Free Newsletter:

DCIT vs. Nalwa Investments Ltd (ITAT Delhi)

COURT:
CORAM:
SECTION(S):
GENRE:
CATCH WORDS:
COUNSEL:
DATE: (Date of pronouncement)
DATE: May 29, 2011 (Date of publication)
AY:
FILE:
CITATION:

Click here to download the judgement (nalwa_jindal_14A_271_1_c.pdf)


No s. 271(1)(c) penalty for failure to disallow u/s 14A

For AY 2005-06 the assessee had investments in shares of Rs. 37 crores on which it earned tax-free dividend. The assessee also had borrowings of Rs. 33 crores on which it paid interest of Rs. 1.10 crores. However, no disallowance u/s 14A was made. The AO computed the disallowance at Rs. 95 lakhs and levied penalty under Explanation 1 to 271(1)(c) on the ground that there was no satisfactory explanation for not attributing expenses to tax-free income. This was deleted by the CIT (A). On appeal by the department, HELD dismissing the appeal:

Though the computation of s. 14A disallowance was not made, the figures of dividend and interest were stated in the P&L A/c. Even the tax auditors did not state that s. 14A disallowance should be made. As there is no allegation by the AO that there was collusion between the auditor and the assessee to ignore s. 14A, it cannot be said that the explanation was not bona fide. Further, as Rule 8D was not enacted at the time, segregation of expenditure relatable to tax-free income would be disputable and lead to bona fide difference in opinion. So, penalty u/s 271(1)(c) cannot be levied.

Note: The same view has been taken in ACIT vs. Jindal Equipment Leasing (included in the file).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*