Aban Investments (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, Company Circle 1 (1), Chennai

52 SOT 36Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#21032 most cited
4

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Judgments citing Aban Investments (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, Company Circle 1 (1), Chennai

Haldia Coke and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Circle 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only

ITA 1796/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Feb 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2015-16 Haldia Code & Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, No.18/3, Sigapi Achi Building, Circle-11(1), 4Th Floor, Rukmini Lakshmipathi Road, New Delhi. Egmore, Chennai, Tamilnadu – 600 004. Pan: Aabch5389P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.02.2023 Order

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH : C : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI C.M. GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Haldia Code and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Vs. DCIT, No.18/3, Sigapi Achi Building, Circle-11(1), 4th Floor, Rukmini Lakshmipathi Road, New Delhi. Egmore, Chennai, Tamilnadu – 600 004. PAN: AABCH5389P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Revenue by : Shri Anuj Garg, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 08.02.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 13.02.2023 ORDER This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.12.2018…

Haldia Coke and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Addl. CIT, Range- 11, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 470/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144(13)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

…e appellant relies on the following decisions: 1) ITAT Delhi decision in the case of T&T Motors Limited Vs Addl.CIT, Range-16, New Delhi (I.T.A No.5096 / Del / 2011 dated 22.11.2013). 2) Aban Investments (P.) Ltd Vs DCIT, Company Circle 1(1), Chennai [2012] 52 SOT 36 (Chennai)(URO) b) The Assessing Officer erred in not excluding the investments in subsidiary companies while computing the disallowance u/s.14A r.w Rule 8D.ln this connection the appellant relies on the following decisions: 1) Interglobe Enterprises Ltd Vs DCIT (ITA No 1362 & 1032 / DEL / 2013 dated 04.04.2013) ITAT Delhi 2) ITAT Chennai decisio…

Haldia Coke and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Addl. CIT, Range- 11, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 471/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Jul 2022AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Anupama Singla, Senior DR
Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…we rely on the following ITAT Order : i. ITAT Delhi decision in the case of T&T Motors Limited Vs Addl.CIT, Range-16, New Delhi (I.T.A No.5096/Del/2011 dated 22.11.2013) -Annexure-2 ii. Aban Investments (P.) Ltd Vs DCIT, Company Circle 1 (1), Chennai [2012] 52 SOT 36 (Chennai)(URO) - Annexure-3 In the following cases, it has been held that strategic investments made in subsidiary companies have to be excluded for computation of disallowance u/s.14A r.w. Rule 8D. I. ITAT Chennai in the case of EIH Associated Hotels Ltd Vs D CIT In I.T.A. No.1503/Mds/2012 date 17.07.2013 - Annexure 4 II. ITAT Chennai decision i…

DCIT (TDS) 1(3), Mumbai vs. Laqshya Media P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 4390/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A.D.Jainसर्वश्री ए.डी. जैन, न्याययक सदस्य आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4390/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-11) बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income M/S Laqshya Media Pvt Ltd., Tax Officer-26(1)4, Laqshya House, Next To Vs. Smt(Tds) -1(3), Rameshwar Temple, Room No.703, 7Th Floor, Saraswati Baug, Society Road, K.G.Mittal Ayurvedik Hospital Jogeshshwari (E), Building, Charni Road, Mumbai-400060 Mumbai-400002 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

Section 194Section 194A(3)Section 194HSection 194JSection 2Section 201

…nt interest. The banks charge processing fees to reduce interest rate and to show income in the year of sanction. In support of the submissions raised, the assessee placed strong reliance on the decision of Tribunal in the case of 3 Aban Investments V/s DCIT (52 SOT 36) (Chennai (URO) and the decision of Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Bilt Power V/s ACIT (34 CCH 334) in which the Tribunal held since „processing fees‟ fall within the definition of interest provided in section 2(28A) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, these fall in the exclusion provided in section 194A(3) of the Act hence and hence, tax is n…

Aban Investments (P.) Ltd. v. DCIT, Company Circle 1 (1), Chennai (52 SOT 36) — Cited in 4 Judgments | BharatTax