The Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai v. Dewa Properties Ltd
[Citation -2020-LL-0706-2]
| Citation | 2020-LL-0706-2 |
|---|---|
| Appellant Name | The Commissioner of Income-tax, Chennai |
| Respondent Name | Dewa Properties Ltd. |
| Court | HIGH COURT OF MADRAS |
| Relevant Act | Income-tax |
| Date of Order | 06/07/2020 |
| Judgment | View Judgment |
| Keyword Tags | substantial question of law • investment portfolio • rights issue • expenditure incurred in relation to the exempt income • disallowance of expenditure • interest bearing fund |
| Bot Summary: | Mr.T.Ravikumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel appearing for the appellant Revenue submitted that vide paragraph 6 of the order of the Tribunal, the Tribunal has held that disallowance of Rs.2.00 Lakhs in the facts and circumstances of the case, would be appropriate under Section 14A of the Act, which enables the Revenue to disallow the expenditure incurred in relation to earning an income which is exempt from payment of tax. We have heard the submissions made by the representatives of both the sides and have also perused the orders of the authorities below. Since the assessee has only invested in private limited, un-listed companies and one of the companies in which the assessee has made investment is its own group concern, we are of the view that the addition made by the CIT is on the higher side. Mr.Sivaraman, learned counsel for the Assessee also submitted that no question of law arises in the present case requiring consideration of this Court under Section 260A of the Act. Having heard the learned counsel for both sides, we are of the clear opinion that the findings of the Tribunal given in paragraph 6 of the order quoted above, do not give rise to any substantial question of law in the present appeal under Section 260A of the Act. The extent of expenditure to be disallowed under Section 14A of the Act would naturally depend upon the income earned by the Assessee and spending that income and extent of exemption they have drawn. Dt.06.07.2020 4/5 not find any perversity in the order passed by the Tribunal and the disallowance made under Section 14A of the Act appears to be just and reasonable and therefore, we do not find any substantial question of law in the present appeal by the Revenue, which requires our further consideration under Section 260A of the Act. |