ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT

DCIT Circle-27(1), New Delhi vs. Wahid Sandhar Sugars Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannua N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

…. Even otherwise in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. 8 I.T.A. No. 6508/Del/2019 [165 ITD 27 (Del.) (SB)] and also the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd. Vs. CIT [374 ITR 108] only those investments which yielded Tax free dividend income should be considered for disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii). Therefore, we see no infirmity in the order passed by the ld. CIT (Appeals). The ground raised by the Revenue is rejected. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. 11. Order pronounced in the open court on : 2…

Jaypee Infra Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-13(2), New Delhi

Accordingly these grounds in hand deserve to be allowed with a direction to the Ld

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4582/Del/2018 , A.Y. 2012-13 Jaypee Infra Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, (Erstwhile Known As Jaypee Infra Circle-13(2), Ventures) New Delhi (A Private Company With Unlimited Liability) Sector 128, Noida- 201304, Up Pan : Aaccj5628G Appellant Respondent

…me has been received should not be considered. 2. That the said non-acceptance of the claim of the Appellant by the Ld. CIT(A) is against the binding decisions of jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of ACB India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT reported in [2015] 374 ITR 108 (Delhi) and of the Delhi ITAT Special bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. reported in [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 45 (ITAT Delhi) (SB) 3. That the non-acceptance of the claim of the Appellant without proper reasons is against the facts and law involved. 4. That the grounds of appeal as herein are without prejudice to each other. 5.…

DCIT, Circle-13(2), New Delhi vs. Jaypee Infra Ventures, Noida

Accordingly these grounds in hand deserve to be allowed with a direction to the Ld

Bench: Sh. G.S.Pannu, Hon’Ble & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 4582/Del/2018 , A.Y. 2012-13 Jaypee Infra Ventures Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit, (Erstwhile Known As Jaypee Infra Circle-13(2), Ventures) New Delhi (A Private Company With Unlimited Liability) Sector 128, Noida- 201304, Up Pan : Aaccj5628G Appellant Respondent

…me has been received should not be considered. 2. That the said non-acceptance of the claim of the Appellant by the Ld. CIT(A) is against the binding decisions of jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in the case of ACB India Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT reported in [2015] 374 ITR 108 (Delhi) and of the Delhi ITAT Special bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. reported in [2017] 82 Taxmann.com 45 (ITAT Delhi) (SB) 3. That the non-acceptance of the claim of the Appellant without proper reasons is against the facts and law involved. 4. That the grounds of appeal as herein are without prejudice to each other. 5.…

Talbros Automotive Components Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-25(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed as indicated

Bench: Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaआ.अ.सं/.I.T.A No.8239/Del/2018 िनधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year:2014-15 बनाम Talbros Automotive Components Ltd., Acit Vs. 1411 & 1412, Nicholson Road, Circle 25(1), Kashmiri Gate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan No. Aaact0265F अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

…position the Ld. Counsel relied on the following decisions: - 1. PCIT vs. Caraf Builders & Constructions (P) Ltd. (101 taxmann.com 67) (Del.) [SLP dismissed by SC in PCIT vs. Caraf Builders & Constructions] (112 taxmann.com 322); 2. ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT (374 ITR 108) (Del.); 3. ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (165 ITD 27) (Del.) (SB). 4. The Ld. Counsel further submits that if the investments on which dividend yielded was considered for the purpose of disallowance the disallowance works out to Rs.3,13,585/- being 0.5% of average investments of Rs.6,26,17,020/-. I.T.A. No. 8239/Del/2018 5. Ld. DR supported th…

M/S. Religare Enterprise Ltd., Noida vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

…Rules [including rule 8D(2)(i) and 8D(2)(iii)]: (a) Disallowance (both interest and administrative expenditure) should be computed only qua the investment which actually yielded exempt income during the year under consideration [refer ACB India Ltd. v. ACIT: 374 ITR 108 (Del), PCIT v. Caraf Builders & Constructions (P.) Ltd: 261 Taxman 47 (Del), REI Agro Ltd vs. DCIT: 144 ITD 141(Kol.), ACIT v. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd.: 165 ITD 27 (Del Trib.) (SB)], Religare Enterprises Ltd. v. DCIT: 1549/De1l2014 (Del Trib.)]; 4 ITA No.5116/Del./2016 (b) Disallowance under section 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the R…

Ptc India Financial Services Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 19(1) & (2), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

…rd lending only. [Refer Page. 60 of PB] • Only dividend yielding investments should be considered for computing amount of disallowance under Rule 8D(iii). Reliance placed upon the judgment passed by the jurisdictional HC in the case of - ACB India Ltd (2015) (374 ITR 108) Delhi He [Refer Para 8 on Page 90 of case law compilation binder, and by Special bench in the case of Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd [2017] 58 ITR(T) 313 (Delhi - Trib.) (SB).” 20. Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the order of the ld. CIT (A). 21. Upon careful consideration, we accept the proposition that assessee’s own fund are more…

M/S. Ptc India Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

…rd lending only. [Refer Page. 60 of PB] • Only dividend yielding investments should be considered for computing amount of disallowance under Rule 8D(iii). Reliance placed upon the judgment passed by the jurisdictional HC in the case of - ACB India Ltd (2015) (374 ITR 108) Delhi He [Refer Para 8 on Page 90 of case law compilation binder, and by Special bench in the case of Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd [2017] 58 ITR(T) 313 (Delhi - Trib.) (SB).” 20. Per contra, ld. DR for the Revenue relied upon the order of the ld. CIT (A). 21. Upon careful consideration, we accept the proposition that assessee’s own fund are more…

Thomson Press (India) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Spl. Range- 9, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandraassessment Year: 2013-14

…l) on the proposition that disallowance under section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income. The Ld. AR further submitted that revised working was furnished before the Ld. CIT(A) placing reliance on Hon’ble Delhi High Court’s decision in ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108 (Delhi) wherein it is held that only those investments have to be considered for disallowance which yield exempt income. The Ld. CIT(A) did not appreciate, though the revision made by the assessee was in accord with the ratio of decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Bharat General Reinsurance Co. Ltd. 81 ITR 303 (Delhi). 4.4 The Ld. DR…

Dharampal Pemchand Ltd., Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle-29, Delhi

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Narender Kumar Choudharysl. Ita No(S) Assessment Appeal(S) By No(S) Year(S) Appellant Vs. Respondent Appellant Respondent 1. 4300/Del/2018 2013-14 Dharampal Premchand Ltd. Dcit 4873, Chandni Chowk, Central Circle – 29 Delhi-110 006 New Delhi Pan : Aaacd 1952 B 2. 2907/Del/2018 2015-16 -Do- -Do- 3. -Do- -Do- 6014/Del/2019 2016-17 4. 82/Del/2022 2017-18 -Do- -Do- Assessee By Shri G. N. Gupta, Adv. Revenue By Shri Harpal Singh Kharab, Sr. D.R Date Of Hearing: 21.03.2023 Date Of Pronouncement: 31.03.2023

…ave actually yielded dividend income during the relevant year should be considered and not the entire investments and to support the aforesaid contention he placed reliance on the decision of Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108. He thereafter pointed to page 13 of the paper book wherein the details of dividend income earned by the assessee is tabulated and from the aforesaid table he pointed to the fact that all the investments have not yielded dividend income. He thereafter submitted that identical issue arose in assessee’s own case in A.Y. 2014-15 before the Tribunal…