Income Tax appellate tribunal appeal dismissed as no substantial question of law arose regarding lease rental disallowance validity or Section 14A application on remand findings.
Appeal dismissed as no substantial question of law arose for consideration.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
$~35
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-9 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel for Revenue.
versus
M/S. TIMES INTERNET LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Aggarwal and Mr. Uma Shankar, Advs.
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SUNIL GAUR
O R D E R % 06.09.2017
systems. It also inter alia operates and manages the web portal www.indiatimes.com. In its return for Assessment Year 2006-07, it reported a total income of `21,58,20,209/-. The bone of contention in these appeals pertains to firstly the amount claimed as lease rentals. The AO and subsequently the CIT disallowed a four month period between April and August, 2005. The main premise for this conclusion was that a lease deed was entered into subsequently and contained a specific recital to the effect that possession had been handed over on that date (i.e. date of execution of the lease deed). Though the AO and CIT(A) held against the assessee, the ITAT upset those findings based upon a letter of the lessor/parent company dated 03.03.2010.
under Section 14. The AO, therefore, complied and returned a much lower figure of `2,00,000/-. Having regard to these circumstances, the Court is of the opinion that there is no question of law involved as far as this issue is concerned.
The appeal is, therefore, dismissed.
S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J
SUNIL GAUR, J
SEPTEMBER 06, 2017 kks
Page 3 of 3
ITA No.715/2017
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the disallowance of lease rentals claimed for April to August 2005 by the lower authorities is rightly made.
Whether the quantum and method of disallowance under Section 14A of the Act are valid and legal.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Maxopp Investments v. CITApplied¶13
(2012) 347 ITR 272 (Del)
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-9
M/s. Times Internet Ltd.
S. Ravindra Bhat
Sunil Gaur
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
