DCIT(CC) 5 1,MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. CEMINDIA PROJECTS LIMITED, MUMBAI

ITA 7295/MUM/2026Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 September 2026AY 2020-218 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order which deleted disallowances on contingency expenses, Section 14A, and transfer pricing adjustment. The assessee filed a cross-objection. The Revenue's appeal was initially barred by limitation but was condoned.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the CIT(A)'s order, finding no reason to interfere. The Tribunal followed the decisions of Coordinate Benches on identical factual controversies. The assessee's cross-objection was dismissed as infructuous.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowances on contingency expenses, Section 14A, and transfer pricing adjustments were justified. Whether the CIT(A) correctly deleted these additions based on previous tribunal orders.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A,Section 133A,Section 143(3),Section 144C(3),Section 92C,Section 115JB,Section 86

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE & MS. RATNA DASGUPTA

For Respondent: Shri Ajay Uke, Sr. DR

Heard together (2 matters)

ITA7295/MUM/2026
CO 309/MUM/2026

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

PER BENCH:

The instant appeal of the revenue and cross objection by the assessee filed against the ord

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 15,814 judgments and leading authorities on Section 14A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →