ADURJEE & BROTHERS PRIVATE LIMITED,PUNE vs. DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-1(1), PUNE
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer considered the entire investments, not just those yielding exempt income. Following a Special Bench decision, the Tribunal directed a fresh computation of disallowance as per law.
What were the facts?
The assessee challenged a disallowance made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D for indirect expenditure related to exempt income. The Assessing Officer considered all investments, not just those yielding exempt income.
What were the issues?
Whether the disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D was correctly computed by considering all investments instead of only those yielding exempt income.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide 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.
- ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.789 citing82 Taxmann.com 415 · 2017 · HC
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, PUNE
Before: SHRI S.S.GODARA, JM & SHRI DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, AM
आदेश / ORDER
PER S. S. GODARA, JM :
This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2012-13 is directed against the CIT(A)- 11, Pune’s order dated 03/10/2019 passed in case No. PN/CIT(A)-11/DCIT Cen.Cir.1(1)/PN/228/2014-15 involving proceeding u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short "the Act”. Heard both the parties. Case file perused.
Learned counsel states at the outset he is only pressing for the assessee’s second substantive ground challenging correctness of both the lower authorities action making section 14A r.w. Rule 8D disallowance of Rs. Rs. 79,22,635/-(indirect expenditure) in relation to its exempt income from dividends and share of profit from partnership firms amounting to Rs.61,63,889/- and (-) Rs15600; respectively, coming to net sum of Rs.61,48,289/-.
Learned counsel invited our attention to the Assessing Officer’s detailed computation sheet Annexure – 1 that he had considered the assessee’s entire investments as against those only yielding exempt income. Faced with this situation and in light of this tribunal’s Special Bench decision in ACIT V/s Vireet Investments (P) Ltd. 82 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi- Trb.) (SB), we reject the Revenue’s vehement arguments supporting the impugned disallowance in principle and direct the assessing authority to frame afresh computation as per law in above terms. Ordered accordingly.
No other ground has been pressed before us.
This assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on this 19th day of July, 2022.
Similar judgments
Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.
- Dcm Shriram Industris Ltd, New Delhi vs DCIT Circle-7(1), New DelhiDelhi18 Mar 2026Partly Allowed
Also relies on ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
The Tribunal deleted the disallowance under Section 14A as the assessee had no exempt income. It also held that Section 14A disallowances cannot be added to book profits under Section 115JB. Certain computational errors ...
- Apcotex Industries Limited, Raigarh vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle…Mumbai13 Mar 2026Partly Allowed
Also relies on ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
The Tribunal held that for Section 14A disallowance, the AO must consider investments that yielded exempt income and also compute disallowance under the second limb of Rule 8D(2). For depreciation on rented office premis...
- Bajaj International Realty Private Limited… vs DCIT, 1(2)1, MumbaiMumbai13 Feb 2026Partly Allowed
Also relies on ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
The Tribunal restored the issue related to Section 43CA additions to the Assessing Officer for adjudication, considering additional evidence. Grounds related to disallowance under Section 14A and adjustment for book prof...
- Trent Limited, Mumbai vs Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2(3)(1)…Mumbai30 Jan 2026Partly Allowed
Also relies on ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
The Tribunal allowed the assessee's claim for discounts on unredeemed gift cards and vouchers, holding that the discount crystallizes at the time of sale. It also directed the Assessing Officer to pass an order for book ...
- Veedol Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs DCIT, Circle 4(1), KolkataKolkata13 Jan 2026Partly Allowed
Also relies on ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.
The Tribunal held that club expenses incurred by a corporate entity are wholly and exclusively for business purposes and thus allowable. For Section 14A, the disallowance should be restricted to investments yielding exem...
More judgments on Section 14A
- Blacksoil Capital Private Limited (As… vs DCIT, Circle-1(1), HyderabadITA 2217/HYD/2026[2017-18]Status: Disposed9 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Hiral Construction, Mumbai vs ITO Ward 42(1)(2), MumbaiITA 8431/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- The Dy DIT (It) 1(2), Mumbai vs M/S Citi Bank N.A, MumbaiITA 4981/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S. Citi Bank N.A., Mumbai vs The Addl DIT (It) RG-1, MumbaiITA 4970/MUM/2007[2002-2003]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2002-2003
- M/S American Express Bank Ltd., Mumbai vs The Jt DIT (It)1(1), MumbaiITA 9414/MUM/2004[2000-2001]Status: Disposed8 Oct 2026AY 2000-2001
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sri Mohanraj vs. Assistant Commissioner Of Commercial TaxesKarnataka · 4 Nov 2026
- Rabindranath Behera vs. The Chief Commissioner, CT And GST, OdishaOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Dinesh Dash vs. State Of OdishaOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S.Ishwar Chandra Barik, Keonjhar vs. Commissioner(Appeal), GST, Central Excise And Customs, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S.Surveillance System, Sambalpur vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST Odisha , CT And GST Commissionerate , Cuttack OdishaOrissa · 3 Nov 2026