HN Safal Infra Developer Pvt. Ltd. Vs PCIT (ITAT Ahmedabad)
ITAT Ahmedabad: PCIT’s 263 Revision on 14A Quashed – No Automatic Disallowance; Jurisdictional Safeguards Ignored – Tribunal Sets Aside 263 Order
Background
- PCIT invoked sec.263, revising assessment order u/s 143(3) dated 12.04.2021.
- Grounds: AO failed to make disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D on exempt income of ₹55,978/- earned from LLP/firm investments.
- PCIT held AO’s order “erroneous & prejudicial to Revenue,” directed AO to recompute disallowance.
- Assessee challenged revision, arguing:
Order passed in name of amalgamated (non-existent) entity.
AO had already called for details & applied mind.
PCIT cannot substitute AO’s satisfaction with her own.
Tribunal’s Findings
Jurisdiction under Sec.263:
- AO must first record dissatisfaction u/s 14A(2) with assessee’s claim before invoking Rule 8D.
- Disallowance is not automatic merely because exempt income exists.
- PCIT assumed revisionary jurisdiction ignoring this statutory safeguard.
Ignoring Assessee’s Explanation:
- Assessee had explained that no expenditure was incurred for exempt income (detailed item-wise).
- PCIT did not examine correctness of explanation; she directly directed AO to disallow.
- This was contrary to SC in Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Gujarat HC rulings (CIMS Hospital, GSFC, Gujarat Fluorochemicals).
Error in Law:
- PCIT cannot usurp AO’s role by directing disallowance without examining AO’s satisfaction.
- Revision based on presumption of automatic 14A disallowance is bad in law.
Decision
- ITAT held PCIT’s order unsustainable.
- Entire revision u/s 263 quashed.
- Assessee’s appeal allowed in full.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD
Want to Read the Complete Judgment?
You have read the free case summary. Unlock the full judgment, the detailed judicial reasoning and the downloadable PDF, along with every other premium judgment on TaxGuru.
Already subscribed? Log in
One subscription covers the entire premium judgment library, not just this case.


