TECK CONSULTANCY AND SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE 8(2), MUMBAI

ITA 2166/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 September 2026AY 2016-1716 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the assessee's view on not disallowing expenses under Section 14A for dividend income on stock-in-trade was plausible, supported by Supreme Court decisions. For AY 2017-18, it was held that Section 14A disallowances cannot be made to book profits under Section 115JB, citing a Special Bench decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee company, engaged in dealing in shares, earned dividend income but did not initially disallow expenses under Section 14A. The Assessing Officer made a disallowance and initiated penalty proceedings. For AY 2017-18, the addition was made to book profits under Section 115JB, leading to penalty under Section 270A.

What were the issues?

Whether penalty under Section 271(1)(c) or 270A is leviable when the assessee takes a plausible view supported by judicial pronouncements, and whether Section 14A disallowances can be made to book profits under Section 115JB.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 271(1)(c),Section 153A,Section 143(2),Section 142(1),Section 10(34),Section 270A,Section 115JB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “E” BENCH; MUMBAI

Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV

Hearing: 15.07.2026Pronounced: 15.09.2026

PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M : These are two appeals filed by the Assessee against the respective orders of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 48, Mumbai [‘Ld.CIT(A)’], both dated 17.12.2025, pertaining to Assessment Year (AY) 2016-17 and 2017-18, challenging the sustenance of levy of penalty u/s. 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’).

2.

Firstly, we take up ITA No. 2166/Mum/2026 for A.Y 2016-17. Briefly, the facts of the case are that a search and seizure action under section 132 was carried out on 25.03.2021 in case of Shubham Ca

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 14A

All 15,875 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →