CIT vs. GOETZE (INDIA) LTD

ITA - 1179 / 2010HC Delhi09 December 201340 pages
For Petitioner: ROHIT MADAN
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the Commissioner was justified in invoking Section 263 as the Assessing Officer's order was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue. The matter regarding the quantum of deduction under Section 14A was remanded to the tribunal.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the ITAT's order setting aside the CIT's order under Section 263. The assessee had revised its return, and the CIT believed the Assessing Officer's order was erroneous and prejudicial to the Revenue regarding deductions and disallowance of expenditure for exempt dividend income.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT's order under Section 263 was justified, and the applicability of Section 14A for computing book profits and disallowing expenditure related to exempt dividend income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 263,Section 115JA,Section 14A,Section 115JB,Section 234D

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cited by 121 judgments on BharatTax

See all citing judgments →

Counted from the text of the judgments hosted here. Most recent first.

Cases cited in this judgment(15)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

ITA Nos. 1179/2010, 1366/2010, 1979/2010 & 2106/2010 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1179/2010

Reserved on: 22nd October, 2013 Date of decision: 9th December, 2013

(Assessment Year 2000-01)

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-II)

..... Appellant Through Mr. Rohit Madan, Advocate.

versus

GOETZE (INDIA) LIMITED

..... Respondent Through Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Geetanjali Mohan and Ms. Mansi Gautam, Advocates. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-II)

..... Appellant Through Mr. Rohit Madan, Advocate.

versus

FEDERAL-MOGUL GOETZE (INDIA) LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Geetanjali Mohan and Ms. Mansi Gautam, Advocates.

+ INCOME TAX APPEAL No. 1979/2010

(Assessment Year 2001-02)

THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CENTRAL-II)

..... Appellant Through Mr. Rohit Madan, Advocate.

2013:DHC:6339-DB

ITA Nos. 1179/2010, 1366/2010, 1979/2010 & 2106/2

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 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →