High CourtsDivision Bench(2023) 12 DEL CK 3953

D Commissioner Of Income Tax vs MS Jite Shipyard Ltd

Delhi High Court · Decided on 13 December 2023

HON’BLE JUDGES
Rajiv Shakdher, J · Girish Kathpalia, J
CASE NUMBER
ITA 757/2023, CM APPL. 64453/2023 & 64454/2023

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

12 paragraphs · 252 words

RAJIV SHAKDHER, J.: (ORAL)

1.

This appeal concerns Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16.

2.

Via the instant appeal, the appellant/revenue seeks to assail the order dated 27.03.2023 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal [in short, “Tribunal”].

3.

It is not in dispute that the only issue that arises for consideration in the instant appeal is: Whether disallowance made under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [in short, “the Act”] can exceed the exempt income earned by the respondent/assessee?

4.

There is no dispute that the issue raised, hereinabove, is covered by the following judgments:

(i)

Cheminvest Limited v. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, (2015) 61 taxmann.com 118.

(ii)

Commissioner of Income-tax, Central 1, Chennai v. Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd., (2017) 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras).

5.

To be noted, one of us [Rajiv Shakdher, J.], was part of the bench that authored the judgment in Commissioner of Income-tax, Central 1, Chennai v. Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd.. A special leave petition (SLP) filed by the appellant/revenue, against the said judgment, was dismissed by the Supreme Court on 02.07.2018 [reported in (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC)], both on the grounds of delay and merits.

6.

The order of the Supreme Court in the said matter reads as follows:

“1.

The Special Leave petition is dismissed on the ground of delay as well as on merits.”

7.

In these circumstances, no substantial question of law arises for our consideration. The appeal is, accordingly, closed.

8.

Consequently, the pending applications are rendered infructuous and are, accordingly, closed.