DCIT 9(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. FUTURE RETAIL LTD, MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5959/MUM/2016Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 August 2020AY 2012-1323 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the disallowance under Section 14A, particularly concerning investments in group concerns, was not applicable, following previous decisions in the assessee's own case. The Tribunal also addressed the delay in pronouncement due to the COVID-19 lockdown, considering it an extraordinary circumstance.

What were the facts?

The assessee, engaged in manufacturing and retailing, filed its return of income. The Assessing Officer (AO) made various disallowances and additions. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who partly allowed the appeal. Both the assessee and the revenue filed further appeals.

What were the issues?

Whether disallowance under Section 14A is applicable to investments in group concerns and subsidiaries, and whether the delay in pronouncement of the order due to the COVID-19 lockdown is justifiable.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 14A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(13)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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “F”

Before: SHRI C. N. PRASAD, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM

For Appellant: Shri Vipul Joshi, AR, DR 2

Heard together (2 matters)

I.T.A. No. 5959/Mum/2016
I.T.A. No. 867/Mum/2017

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

आदेशकीप्रनिनिनिअग्रेनर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अपीलाथी/ The Appellant 1. 2. प्रत्यथी/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A) 4. आयकरआयुक्त/ CIT- concerned M/s Future Retail Ltd.

More judgments on Section 14A

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →