ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT

374 ITR 108High Court2015#205 most cited

What is ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT authority for?

When computing disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act using Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, only investments that have actually yielded exempt income during the relevant previous year are to be considered for the calculation.

364

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACB India Ltd v ACIT · Section 14A · Rule 8D · disallowance under Section 14A · expenditure for exempt income · investments yielding exempt income · computation of disallowance · Delhi High Court 374 ITR 108 · non-yielding investments · average investments Rule 8D

Also reported as

62 Taxmann.com 71235 Taxmann 22

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 153ASection 1961Section 80ICSection 153DSection 132(1)Section 56(2)(x)

Issues it is cited on

section 153a proceedingsstrategic investmentsection 14a(2)section 80icdisallowance under section 14asection 115jb(2)section 56(2)(x)valuation of sharesdisallowance u/s 14asection 139(5)disallowance of interest expendituresection 92b

Judgments citing ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT

M/S. Niagara Hotels & Builders Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward-13(2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed

ITA 5937/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Dec 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. K. N. Chary, Jm Ita No. 1729/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2004-05 Ita No. 2160/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Ita No. 5937/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Niagara Hotels & Builders Pvt. Vs Acit, Circle-13(1)/ Ltd., G- 6 & 7, Vikram Tower, Income Tax Officer, 16, Rajendra Place, Ward-13(2), New Delhi-110008 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacn0188P Assessee By : Sh. Shaily Gupta, Ca & Sh. Divyam Mittal, Ca Revenue By : Sh. S. P. Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 13.12.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: These Three Appeals By The Assessee Are Directed Against The Separate Order Dated 30.12.2013 & 22.08.2013 Of Ld. Cit(A)- Xvi, Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Shaily Gupta, CA &For Respondent: Sh. S. P. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 24

…per Rules 8D(2)(iii) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 stands reduced to Rs.13,584/- and the calculations for the same were furnished to the ld. CIT(A). The reliance was placed on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd. Vs ACIT 374 ITR 108. 22. In his rival submissions, the ld. DR strongly supported the orders of the authorities below and further submitted that no calculation was furnished before the AO for the disallowance to be made u/s 14A of the Act but the same has been furnished first time before the ld. CIT(A). 23. We have considered the submissions of both the parties and…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ambience Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the Revenue in case of Ambience Hotels and Resorts Pvt Ltd in ITA No

ITA 6422/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri TR Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Aparna Karan, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 60

…he ld CIT(A), preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A), has restricted the disallowance of 0.5% only on the investments which has given dividend during the year. The ld CIT(A) relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of ACG India Ltd Vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108. 17. The ld Departmental Representative could not point out any error in the order of the ld CIT(A). in view of this ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 18. In ITA No. 6422/Del/2015 vide ground No. 3 the revenue has raised that ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 6285102/- u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act. The ld CIT(A) deleted…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ambience Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the Revenue in case of Ambience Hotels and Resorts Pvt Ltd in ITA No

ITA 6421/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri TR Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Aparna Karan, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 60

…he ld CIT(A), preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A), has restricted the disallowance of 0.5% only on the investments which has given dividend during the year. The ld CIT(A) relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of ACG India Ltd Vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108. 17. The ld Departmental Representative could not point out any error in the order of the ld CIT(A). in view of this ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 18. In ITA No. 6422/Del/2015 vide ground No. 3 the revenue has raised that ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 6285102/- u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act. The ld CIT(A) deleted…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ambience Hotels & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal of the Revenue in case of Ambience Hotels and Resorts Pvt Ltd in ITA No

ITA 6420/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri TR Talwar, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Aparna Karan, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 60

…he ld CIT(A), preferred appeal before the ld CIT(A), has restricted the disallowance of 0.5% only on the investments which has given dividend during the year. The ld CIT(A) relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of ACG India Ltd Vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108. 17. The ld Departmental Representative could not point out any error in the order of the ld CIT(A). in view of this ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 18. In ITA No. 6422/Del/2015 vide ground No. 3 the revenue has raised that ld CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 6285102/- u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act. The ld CIT(A) deleted…

Likhami Commercial Co. Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Cir-7, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 432/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata17 Nov 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri Waseem Ahmed, Am]

For Appellant: Smt. Nilima Joshi, FCAFor Respondent: Shri David Z.Chawngthu, Addl. CIT, Sr.DR
Section 14Section 14A

…ments which yielded dividend income during the relevant previous year ought to be considered while working average value of investments. In support of such plea the Assessee relied on decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd. Vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108 (Del.). The CIT(A) did not agree with the aforesaid plea of the Assessee on the ground that the facts of the Assessee’s case are different from the facts of the case decided by Hon’ble Delhi High Court. 7. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A) the Assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. 8. We have heard the rival submissions. Before us the pl…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Modi Rubber Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 105/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Smt Diva Singh & Shri B.P. Jain, [Assessment Year: 2008-09] The A.C.I.T Vs. M/S Modi Rubber Ltd Circle – 5(1) 4 – 7C, Dda Shopping Centre New Delhi New Friends Colony New Delhi Pan : Aaacm 2062 R [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 18.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.11.2017 Assessee By : Shri Rohit Jain Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri Rohit JainFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 37(1)

…Taxman 92 b) Eicher Goodearth Ltd Vs. CIT 378 ITR 28 c) Intergloble Enterprises VS. DCIT ITA No. 1362 & 1032/DEL/2013 d) Cheminvest Ltd Vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 e) CIT Vs. Holcim India P Ltd 272 CTR 282 f) REI Agro Ltd Vs. DCIT 160 TTJ 107 g) ACB India Ltd Vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108 h) CIT Vs. Givo Ltd ITA No. 941/2010 i) Friends Clearing Agency P Ltd Vs. CIT 332 ITR 269 26. In that view of the matter, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the CIT(A) who has rightly deleted the disallowance to the extent as mentioned hereinabove, Thus, Ground No. 3 of the Revenue is dismissed. 27. In the result, the appeal of the Re…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sindhu Trade Links Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and the Cross Objections

ITA 6874/DEL/2015[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Rachna Singh, CIT, DR
Section 14A

…the ld. CIT(A) has restricted the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) by considering only such investment which yielded exempt income, other than the income from strategic investments. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del), has held that value of tax exempt investments should be considered instead of total investments for adopting average value of investments of income which is not part of the total income. The effect of this decision is that while making disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii), it is only the average of those CO No.119 & 120/Del/2016 investment…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sindhu Trade Links Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue and the Cross Objections

ITA 6873/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Ms Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Rachna Singh, CIT, DR
Section 14A

…the ld. CIT(A) has restricted the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) by considering only such investment which yielded exempt income, other than the income from strategic investments. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del), has held that value of tax exempt investments should be considered instead of total investments for adopting average value of investments of income which is not part of the total income. The effect of this decision is that while making disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii), it is only the average of those CO No.119 & 120/Del/2016 investment…

H.T. Media Limited vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-IV

ITA/549/2015HC Delhi23 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 10Section 142Section 143Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 260

…ce had to be restricted to what had been provided by the Assessee, i.e. Rs. 3 lakhs. Alternatively, it was submitted that for the purposes of Rule 8 D (iii) 0.5% of the average value of investment, in terms of the decision in ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del) worked out to Rs. 18.24 lakhs and not the exorbitant sum of Rs.2,08,21,695 as directed by the AO. ITA 548/2015 & 549/2015 Page 13 of 34 Submissions on behalf of the Revenue 24. Mr. Raghvendra Singh and Mr. Ashok Manchanda, learned…

Reliance Infrastructure Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 10(1) Now DCIT Cir 14(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1480/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Reliance Infrastructure 14(3)(1), 453, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Ltd. Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Reliance Energy Centre Vs. Santacruz East, Mumbai- 400055 Pan No. Aaccr7445Q Appellant .. Respondent M/S Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Reliance Energy Centre 14(3)(1), 453, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Santacruz East, Mumbai- Vs. Bhavan, Mumbai-20 400055 Pan No. Aaccr7445Q Appellant .. Respondent

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax M/s Reliance Infrastructure 14(3)(1), 453, 4th Floor, Aayakar Ltd. Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Reliance Energy Centre Vs. Santacruz East, Mumbai- 400055 Pan No. AACCR7445Q Appellant .. Respondent M/s Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Reliance Energy Centre 14(3)(1), 453, 4th Floor, Aayakar Santacruz East, Mumbai- Vs. Bhavan, Mumbai-20 400055 Pan No. AACCR7445Q Appellant .. Respondent Revenue by .. Miss. Santanu Kr. Saikia, CIT. DR .. Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, AR…

DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Infrstructure Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1422/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Jun 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Rajesh Kumar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax M/S Reliance Infrastructure 14(3)(1), 453, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Ltd. Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Reliance Energy Centre Vs. Santacruz East, Mumbai- 400055 Pan No. Aaccr7445Q Appellant .. Respondent M/S Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax Reliance Energy Centre 14(3)(1), 453, 4Th Floor, Aayakar Santacruz East, Mumbai- Vs. Bhavan, Mumbai-20 400055 Pan No. Aaccr7445Q Appellant .. Respondent

Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI RAJESH KUMAR, AM Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax M/s Reliance Infrastructure 14(3)(1), 453, 4th Floor, Aayakar Ltd. Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Reliance Energy Centre Vs. Santacruz East, Mumbai- 400055 Pan No. AACCR7445Q Appellant .. Respondent M/s Reliance Infrastructure Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Reliance Energy Centre 14(3)(1), 453, 4th Floor, Aayakar Santacruz East, Mumbai- Vs. Bhavan, Mumbai-20 400055 Pan No. AACCR7445Q Appellant .. Respondent Revenue by .. Miss. Santanu Kr. Saikia, CIT. DR .. Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, AR…

DCIT, Central Cir. VI, Kolkata vs. M/S J.K. Lakshmi Cement Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s CO is partly allowed

ITA 611/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata26 May 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri Partha Sarathi Chowdhury

Section 142(1)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 32

…Court that disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) could only be made in respect of only those investments on which dividend income has been earned during the year. a) As stated earlier Hon'ble Delhi Court in the case of ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 has also held that that disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(ii) & 8D(2)(iii) could only be with reference to the investment on which dividend income had been earned during the year and this was also the view of Hon'ble Calcutta Tribunal referred above. b) In the case of CIT, Circle - 1, Kolkata v. Teenlok Advisory Services Pvt. Ltd. (2016) 159 ITD 9911…

D.D. Cotton P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2743/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 May 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Shri SL JainFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…ts that only investments on which exempt income earned should be considered for arriving at average investments under this rule and for this proposition he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd. Vs. ACIT [374 ITR 108] and Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT [378 ITR 33]. For the proposition that mutual funds not yielding dividend income 3 M/s D.D.Cotton Pvt.Ltd. shall not be covered u/s 14A, he placed reliance on the decision of the Coordinate Bench in the case of Manugraph India Ltd. Vs. DCIT in ITA No.4761/Mum/2013 and the Chennai Bench in the case of Sundaram Assets…

Orix Auto Infrastructure Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(3)(1), Mumbai

ITA 4480/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai17 Apr 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No. 4480/Mum/2016

For Appellant: Dr. Anupama Singla, Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…e. Regarding judicial pronouncements relied upon by Ld. AR, we find that this issue in the case of REI Agro Ltd. Vs DCIT [ITAT Kolkatta 35 taxmann.com 404], was restored back to the file of AO. The case before Hon’ble Delhi High Court in ACB India Ltd V ACIT [374 ITR 108] dealt with a situation where the assessee had earned dividend. In the case of ACIT Vs Oriental Structural Engineers (P) Ltd. (ITAT Mumbai 4245/Del/2011 02/12/2011], the assessee suffered disallowance of 2% u/s 14A and not u/r 8D. In the case of Garware Wall Ropes Limited Vs ACIT [ITA NO 5408/Mum/2012 dated 15/01/2014], the investments were found…

D.C.I.T., Circle-4, Kolkata vs. M/S. Rossell India Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 2774/KOL/2013[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Mar 2017AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year:2009-10 Dcit, Circle-4, Kolkata V/S. M/S Rossell India Ltd. P-7, Chowringhee 21/1A/3, Darga Road, Square, Kolkata-69 Jindal Towers, Block B, 4Th Floor, Park Circus, Kolkta-700 017 [Pan Noaabcr 3736 J] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…REI Agro Ltd. vs. DCIT (2013) 144 ITD 141 (Kol Trib.) Usha Martin Ventures Ltd. vs. DCIT [ITA No. 847/Kol/2013], Integrated Coal Mining Ltd. s. DICIT [ITA No. 1146/Kol/2012], All Bank Finane Ltd. vs. JCIT [ITA No. 465/Kol/2013], ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT (2015) 374 ITR 108 (Del) and Cheminvest Ltd vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del). ITA No.2774/Kol/2013 A.Y 2009-10 DCIT Cir-4, Kol Vs. M/s Rossell India Ltd. Page 15 5) Without prejudice to the above, it is further submitted that while considering the average value of assets for the purpose of applying Rule 8D(2)(ii) AO erred in considering incorrect figure of average…

Aarti Drugs Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(1), Mumbai

ITA 6783/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra, A.M. & Sanjay Garg,J.M. आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita No. 6783-84/Mum/2014,िनधा" रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 आयकर िनधा"रण आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा" िनधा" रण रण वष" वष" Aarti Drugs Limited Addl. Cit, Range-6(1) Plot No.109, ‘D’ 3Rd Floor, Mahendra Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai. Vs. Indl Estate.Sion(E), Mumbai-400 022. Pan: Aaaca 4410 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 10 .02.2017 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act)

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 10Section 14Section 14ASection 254(1)

…Rs.1, 41, 09, 15, 920/-and that assessee had made investment of Rs. 21.37crores, that it had earned exempt income of Rs.50,944/-. He relied upon the cases of Reliance Utilities Ltd(313ITR340),HDFC Bank Ltd.(366 ITR 505) Joint Investments(372 ITR 694)ACB India(374 ITR 108) Cheminvest Ltd. (378 ITR 33).The Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order of the FAA. 2.3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find that during the year under consideration the assessee had claimed exemption of Rs.50,944/-u/s.10 (34) of the Act, that it had made a disallowance of Rs. 2 lakhs on…

M/S. Bhaskar Industries Private Limited (Formerly Know As Bhaskar Industries Limited), Bhopal vs. The ACIT 1(2), Bhopal

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 68/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…s. We find that the claim of the assessee that no expenditure has been claimed has not been examined by the AO as he had made disallowance by applying rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962 . We find that the Hon Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India (2005) 374 ITR 108 [Del.] wherein the Hon'ble High Court has laid down certain principle and procedure to be followed while calculating the disallowance u/s.14A of the Act. The relevant extract of said decision is reproduced as under: “7. The question of law urged on behalf of the assessee is whether the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal as to the di…

The ACIT, 1(2), Bhopal vs. M/S. Bhaskar Industries Ltd., Bhopal

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee and Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 194/IND/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D.T. Garasia & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…s. We find that the claim of the assessee that no expenditure has been claimed has not been examined by the AO as he had made disallowance by applying rule 8D of Income Tax Rules, 1962 . We find that the Hon Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India (2005) 374 ITR 108 [Del.] wherein the Hon'ble High Court has laid down certain principle and procedure to be followed while calculating the disallowance u/s.14A of the Act. The relevant extract of said decision is reproduced as under: “7. The question of law urged on behalf of the assessee is whether the decision of the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal as to the di…

The West Coast Paper Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 1(3), Mumbai

Appeal stands allowed for Statistical Purposes

ITA 1965/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta -ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Billa-DR
Section 14ASection 254(1)Section 80Section 80I

…आयकर आयकर अपीलीय आयकर आयकर अपीलीय अपीलीय अिधकरण अपीलीय अिधकरण अिधकरण, मुंबई अिधकरण मुंबई मुंबई “जी मुंबई जी जी खंडपीठ जी खंडपीठ खंडपीठ खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“G”Bench Mumbai सव"ी राजे"",लेखा सद"य एवं अमरजीत "सह, "याियक सद"य Before S/Sh.Rajendra,Accountant Member and Amarjit Singh,Judicial Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./1965/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A./1966/Mum/2015,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 वष" The West Coast Paper Mills Ltd. ACIT-1(3) Shreeniwas House Aayakar Bhavan HazarimalSoma…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal by the assessee as well as ofthe department are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 615/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Jan 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Kuldip Singh, Jm Ita No. 302/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tax, Large Tax Payer Unit, Tower-B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda New Delhi District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Ita No. 615/Del/2015 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs Exl Service.Com (India) Pvt. Ltd., 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola, Tower- Tax, Circle-1 (Ltu), New Delhi-110017 B, Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola, New Delhi-110044 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaace5174C Assessee By : Sh. Ajay Vohra, Adv. Sh. Abhishek Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Piyush Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 07.10.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 03.01.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Piyush Jain, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 92D

…ents which actually yielded exempt income during the year should have been taken into consideration as against total investments appearing in the balance sheet for the relevant year. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " ACB India Ltd. Vs ACIT 374 ITR 108 " REI Agro Ltd. Vs DCIT 144 ITD 141 (Kol.) 34. It was contended that the assessee had made the investments in shares of subsidiary company, viz. Exl Support Services Pvt. Ltd., out of commercial expediency, which would accordingly, not fall within the purview of Section 14A of the Act. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: " CIT Vs…