NEETA MALHOTRA, MUMBAI v. ASST CIT (OSD-I) CEN RG 7, MUMBAI

ITA 1912/MUM/2013 | 2009-2010
Pronouncement Date: 09-11-2017 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 191219914 RSA 2013
Assessee PAN AACPM0382R
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 1912/MUM/2013
Duration Of Justice 4 year(s) 8 month(s) 1 day(s)
Appellant NEETA MALHOTRA, MUMBAI
Respondent ASST CIT (OSD-I) CEN RG 7, MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 09-11-2017
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Tags No record found
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 09-11-2017
Date Of Final Hearing 18-07-2017
Next Hearing Date 18-07-2017
First Hearing Date 18-07-2017
Assessment Year 2009-2010
Appeal Filed On 08-03-2013
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL 'B' BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1912/MUM/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) MS. NEETA MALHORA VS. ACIT (OSD - 1) CENTRL RANGE - 7 201 PRIYANKA APARTMENT 6 TH FLOOR J.V.P.D. SCHEME JUHU MUMBAI 400056 AAYAKAR BHAVAN M.K. ROAD MUMBAI 400020 PAN AACPM0382R APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI SUMAN KUMAR DATE OF HEARING: 09.11.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 09.11.2017 O R D E R PER PAWAN SINGH J.M. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 253 OF TH E INCOME TAX ACT IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-40 MUM BAI DATED 20.12.2012 FOR A.Y. 2009-10. 2. THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF AP PEAL: - 1. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN ENHANCING THE ASSESSED IN COME OF THE APPELLANT BY DIRECTING THE AO TO COMPUTE THE AMOUNT DISALLOWABLE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE INCOME-TAX AC T 1961 (THE ACT) READ WITH RULE 8D OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES 196 2 (THE RULES). 2. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN FAILING TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPELLANT HAD NOT INCURRED ANY EXPENDITURE TO EARN TAX FREE INCOM E DURING THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR. 3. THE CIT(A) ERRED IN FAILING TO APPRECIATE THAT THE APPELLANT IS ENGAGED IN SHARE AND DERIVATIVES TRADING ACTIVITY W ITHOUT ANY INTENTION OF EARNING DIVIDEND INCOME AND DIVIDEND EARNED IS ON INCIDENTAL TO THE SAID TRADING ACTIVITY AND NO EXPE NDITURE IS INCURRED TO EARNED DIVIDEND INCOME AND HENCE NO DI SALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A OF THE ACT READ WITH RULE 8D OF T HE RULES IS CALLED FOR. ITA NO.1912/MUM/2013 MS. NEETA MALHORA 2 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE AN INDIVIDUAL FILED HER RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YE AR ON 19.02.2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF ` 56 74 947/-. THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED ON 14 TH DECEMBER 2011 UNDER SECTION 143(3). THE AO WHILE PASSING THE ASSESSMENT ORDER MADE DISALLOWANCE OF ` 24 21 434/- HOLDING THAT THE EXPENSES ARE NOT DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE BUSINESS A CTIVITIES OF THE ASSESSEE. ON APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) THE DISALLOWANCE ON ACC OUNT OF EXPENSES WAS PARTIALLY SUSTAINED. HOWEVER THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS SUED A NOTICE FOR ENHANCEMENT OF INCOME HOLDING THAT THE AO HAS NOT I NVOKED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 14. AFTER GIVING OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSE E THE CIT(A) HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS HOLDING SHARES AS STOCK IN TRADE AND EA RNED DIVIDEND INCOME RELATING TO UNSOLD STOCK OF SHARES. THE MAJOR INVES TMENT OF THE ASSESSEE IS IN MUTUAL FUNDS. HENCE THE AO WAS DIRECTED TO RECOM PUTED THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A R.W. RULE 8D. THUS F URTHER AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED THIS APPEAL BEFORE US. 4. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE DESPITE GIV ING SUFFICIENT TIME. THE ASSESSEE IS NOT APPEARING SINCE BEGINNING DESPITE SERVICE OF NOTICE THROUGH RPAD. A PERUSAL OF RECORDS REVEALS T HAT AUTHORITY LETTER OF SHRI M. RUSHABH H. VYAS CA IS ON RECORD. WHEN NEIT HER THE ASSESSEE NOR HER REPRESENTATIVE APPEARED WE HAVE LEFT WITH NO OP TION EXCEPT TO HEAR THE LEARNED D.R. FOR REVENUE AND TO PROCEED TO DECIDE T HE APPEAL ON THE BASIS OF THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 5. THE LEARNED D.R. FOR THE REVENUE SUPPORTED THE ORDE R OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. THE LEARNED D.R. FURTHER ARGUED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS GIVEN A DIRECTION TO THE AO TO COMPUTE THE DISA LLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A. THE ORDER PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IS NOT PREJUDICIAL TO THE ASSESSEE AS THE ASSESSEE WOULD HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE HER GRIEVANCES AND ARGUMENTS BEFORE THE AO. 6. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LEARNED D .R. FOR REVENUE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. WE NO TED THAT DURING THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS THE LEARNED CIT(A) GIVEN NOTI CE DATED 10.12.2012 FOR ITA NO.1912/MUM/2013 MS. NEETA MALHORA 3 ENHANCEMENT OF INCOME. THE ASSESSEE FILED HER REPLY DATED 19.12.2012. AFTER CONSIDERING THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE TH E LEARNED CIT(A) DIRECTED THE AO TO COMPUTE THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14 A R.W. RULE 8D. BEFORE US THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FILED ANY DOCUMENTAR Y EVIDENCE OR ANY WRITTEN SUBMISSION TO SUBSTANTIATE THE GROUND OF AP PEAL AS TO WHY THE DISALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 14A BE NOT COMPUTED BY T HE AO. IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY EXPLANATION OR SUBMISSION FROM THE A SSESSEE WE DO NOT FIND ANY MERIT IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE AS SESSEE. GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9 TH NOVEMBER 2017. SD/ - SD/ - (G.S. PANNU) (PAWAN SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER MUMBAI DATED: 9 TH NOVEMBER 2017 COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) -40 MUMBAI 4. THE CIT CENTRAL-2 MUMBAI 5. THE DR B BENCH ITAT MUMBAI BY ORDER //TRUE COPY// ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI N.P.