Ashok Seth v. ACIT - Taxpublishers.in

Case Laws Analysis
REFERRED Justice Sam P. Bharucha v. Addl. CIT 2013 TaxPub(DT) 0425 (Mum-Trib)
REFERRED Radhasoami Satsang v. CIT 1992 TaxPub(DT) 0858 (SC)

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 1737 (Del-Trib) IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH SHAMIM YAHYA, A.M., & YOGESH KUMAR US, J.M. Ashok Seth v. ACIT ITA No. 5144/Del/2015 4 April, 2024 Appellant by: Mahesh Kumar, CA Respondent by: Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR. ORDER *Shamim Yahya, A.M.* This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 is directed against the Order of learned Commissioner (Appeals)-20, New Delhi dated 8-6-2015. The assessee has raised the following effective grounds :- On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned ACIT has erred:- 1(a) In confirming the disallowance of Rs. 5,26,256 under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 in respect of investment made in securities when no direct or indirect expenditure in relation to investment in securities has been claimed or debited in the Profit and Loss Account by the appellant. (b) In disallowing Rs. 5,26,256 under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 when no proximate nexus has been established between the expenditure claimed and exempt income by the assessing officer. (c) In ignoring the fact that the expenditure incurred and claimed by the appellant has direct nexus with the professional income of the appellant and none of the expenditure claimed by the assessee is in relation to the exempt income. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax Publishers2024 TaxPub(DT) 1737 (Del-Trib)

IN THE ITAT DELHI BENCH

SHAMIM YAHYA, A.M., & YOGESH KUMAR US, J.M.

Ashok Seth v. ACIT

ITA No. 5144/Del/2015

4 April, 2024

Appellant by: Mahesh Kumar, CA

Respondent by: Indu Bala Saini, Sr. DR.

ORDER

Shamim Yahya, A.M.

This appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 is directed against the Order of learned Commissioner (Appeals)-20, New Delhi dated 8-6-2015. The assessee has raised the following effective grounds :-

On the facts and circumstances of the case, the learned ACIT has erred:-

1(a) In confirming the disallowance of Rs. 5,26,256 under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 in respect of investment made in securities when no direct or indirect expenditure in relation to investment in securities has been claimed or debited in the Profit and Loss Account by the appellant.

(b) In disallowing Rs. 5,26,256 under section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 when no proximate nexus has been established between the expenditure claimed and exempt income by the assessing officer.

(c) In ignoring the fact that the expenditure incurred and claimed by the appellant has direct nexus with the professional income of the appellant and none of the expenditure claimed by the assessee is in relation to the exempt income.