Sonali Kilaje 2-ITXA-1545-17.doc IN HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1545 OF 2017 Pr.Commissioner of Income-Tax 16 Appellant v/s. Dish TV India Ltd. Respondent . Mr. Ashok Kotangle a/w. Prabhakar Ranshur and Sakshi Aundhekar for Appellant. Mr. Jay Nilesh Bhansali for Respondent. CORAM: UJJAL BHUYAN & MILIND N. JADHAV, JJ. DATE : FEBRUARY 11, 2020 P. C :- 1. Heard Mr. Kotangle, learned standing counsel revenue for appellant and Mr. Bhansali, learned counsel for respondent-assessee. 1 of 4 Uploaded on - 13/02/2020 Downloaded on - 14/02/2020 09:13:06 Sonali Kilaje 2-ITXA-1545-17.doc 2. This appeal under Section 260A of Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act for short) has been preferred by revenue against order dated 20.12.2016 passed by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, D Bench, Mumbai (Tribunal for short) in Income Tax Appeal No. 2067/Mum/2015 for Assessment Year 2009-10. 3. Though 4 questions were formulated by appellant as substantial questions of law, Mr. Kotangle submits that following questions correctly refect controversy in question : (a) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Tribunal is justifed in deleting disallowance under Section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961 ignoring fact that investments in group companies will also yield exempt income which will attract disallowance under Section 14A of Act read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962? 2 of 4 Uploaded on - 13/02/2020 Downloaded on - 14/02/2020 09:13:06 Sonali Kilaje 2-ITXA-1545-17.doc (b) Whether on facts and in circumstances of case and in law, Tribunal is justifed in deleting disallowance under Section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961 without appreciating that it is not object for which investment was made, but quality of income, tax-exempt or otherwise, that arises from investment, needs to be considered for purpose of section 14A of Income Tax Act, 1961? 4. On query by Court Mr. Kotangle, learned counsel for appellant submits that above two questions have been decided by Supreme Court against revenue and in favour of assessee in CIT v/s. Essar Teleholdings Ltd., 401 ITR 445. That apart, on identical issue Delhi High Court upheld order passed by Tribunal that in absence of any exempt income, disallowance under Section 14-A of Act was not permissible. Special Leave Petition fled by revenue against said decision has been dismissed by Supreme Court in Principal Commissioner of Income-Tax v/s. Oil Industry 3 of 4 Uploaded on - 13/02/2020 Downloaded on - 14/02/2020 09:13:06 Sonali Kilaje 2-ITXA-1545-17.doc Development Board [2019] 103 taxmann.com 326(SC). 5. In view of above, we fnd no merit in appeal. Accordingly, appeal is dismissed. However, there shall be no order as to costs. (MILIND N. JADHAV, J.) (UJJAL BHUYAN, J.) 4 of 4 Uploaded on - 13/02/2020 Downloaded on - 14/02/2020 09:13:06 Pr. Commissioner of Income-tax-16 v. Dish TV India Ltd