Case Law Details
Case Name : CIT Vs Holcim India P. Ltd. (Delhi High Court)
Related Assessment Year :
Courts :
All High Courts Delhi High Court
Become a Premium member to Download.
If you are already a Premium member, Login here to access.
Sponsored
On the issue whether the respondent-assessee could have earned dividend income and even if no dividend income was earned, yet Section 14A can be invoked and disallowance of expenditure can be made, there are three decisions of the different High Courts directly on the issue and against the appellant-Revenue. No contrary decision of a High Court has been shown to us. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad Vs. M/s. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Sponsored
Kindly Refer to
Privacy Policy &
Complete Terms of Use and Disclaimer.
Mr. SSR, assume that you have invested Rs. 100 on 01.04.2014 in INFOSYS. On 31.03.2015, this investment shall complete 365 Days. Up until end of 31.03.2015, any Capital Gain from this investment shall qualify as STCG only! And STCG (STT – based) is TAXABLE! Therefore, when one closes his BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS on 31.03.2015, in the instant year of assessment, the CG was NOT EXEMPT from TAX; & hence Sec. 14A shall not be invoked.
However, from 01.04.2015, any CG from this investment will be considered as LTCG; & being STT – based, shall be EXEMPT from TAX. Thus, in the year ending MAR 2016, this investment MAY get included in the variable B as per RULE 8D.
However, for RULE 8D to be applicable, the foremost criteria is ONE MUST HAVE EARNED INCOME & MUST HAVE CLAIMED EXEMPTION from TAX on it! The section is applicable on INCOME; & NOT ON INVESTMENTS!!!
I have a different view here. In my opinion, Section 14 A should be applicable even in years when there is actually no tax exempt income. This is because of the fact that, the disallowable character of the expenditure related to the ‘exempt’ income continues even if no income is actually earned in the particular year. For example if certain amount of money is borrowed specifically for making investment in equity share of another company, the interest on such borrowed amount will continue to remain ‘disallowable’, whether or not there is any dividend income out of the investment from such borrowed money.
I have a different view here. In my opinion, Section 14 A should be applicable even in years when there is actually no tax exempt income. This is because of the fact that, the disallowable character of the expenditure related to the ‘exempt’ income continues even if no income is actually earned in the particular year. For example if certain amount of money is borrowed specifically for making investment in equity share of another company, the interest on such borrowed amount will continue to remain ‘disallowable’ irrespective of whether or not there is any dividend income out of the investment from such borrowed money.