ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd.

108 ITD 457Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2007#2483 most cited

What is ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance of expenditure under Section 14A for earning income not forming part of total income, such as dividend or interest, requires a clear nexus between the funds utilized and the exempt income.

47

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. · 108 ITD 457 · Section 14A · disallowance of expenditure · exempt income · dividend income · interest expenditure · nexus · income not taxable · Rule 8D(2)

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 115JBSection 92CA(3)Section 37(1)Section 143(3)Section 250Section 80GSection 112(1)

Issues it is cited on

section 80hhc(3)section 14a(3)section 80lasection 86section 80ib(4)section 80lsection 80ia(4)(i)section 28(iv)section 167bmat creditsection 14a(1)section 167

Judgments citing ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd.

Saurashtra Fuels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee appeal in ITA No 7274/Mum/2012 for assessment year 2009-10 is partly allowed

ITA 7273/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra(D.R.)
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80M

…ds "expenditure incurred" in section 14A refers to expenditure on rent, taxes, salaries, interest, etc. in respect of which allowances are provided for (see sections 30 to 37). 2. The ITAT,Mumbai in the case of ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India ) Limited (2007)108 ITD 457 has negated the contention of the assessee that it had incurred no expenditure for earning high dividends as under: "It is difficult to accept the hypothesis that one can earn substantial dividend income without incurring any expenses whatsoever including management or administrative expenses. By same logic, it is equally difficult to accept tha…

Vishesh H Parekh, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 20(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is dismissed

ITA 4818/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Shri Vishesh H. Parekh, 601-A, Vs. The Asst. Commissioner Of Lok Darshan Military Road, Marol, Income Tax 20(3), Andheri (E), Mumbai 400 059 Mumbai Pan: Agvpp 2722P Appellant .. Respondent

Section 14Section 143Section 14A

…t year, disallowance had to be made on basis of reasonableness and fairness – Held, yes [Partly in favour of assessee].” The learned DR further relied upon the decision rendered by ITAT Bombay “C” Bench in the case of ACIT Vs Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd., 108 ITD 457 wherein it has been held as under:- “The prohibition for allowing the deduction under section 14A for and from the assessment year 1962-63 is in respect of expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to income which does not form par of the total income. The term ‘expenditure’ occurring in section 14A would take in its sweep not only direct…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hcl Infosystems Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three Appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 6420/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. RohitFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…erved that Rule 8D has been incorporated in the I.T. Rules for computing the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income and in view of decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Citycorp Finance India Limited reported in 108 ITD 457 and the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dagga Investment Company Private Limited, that Rule 8D of the Rules is also applicable retrospectively to all pending cases. In view of the aforesaid findings, AO proceeded to compute the amount of disallowance as per formula prescribed in Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules. The AO proceeded to make a f…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hcl Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three Appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 6419/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. RohitFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…erved that Rule 8D has been incorporated in the I.T. Rules for computing the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income and in view of decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Citycorp Finance India Limited reported in 108 ITD 457 and the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dagga Investment Company Private Limited, that Rule 8D of the Rules is also applicable retrospectively to all pending cases. In view of the aforesaid findings, AO proceeded to compute the amount of disallowance as per formula prescribed in Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules. The AO proceeded to make a f…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Hcl Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three Appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3924/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. RohitFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…erved that Rule 8D has been incorporated in the I.T. Rules for computing the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income and in view of decision of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Citycorp Finance India Limited reported in 108 ITD 457 and the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Dagga Investment Company Private Limited, that Rule 8D of the Rules is also applicable retrospectively to all pending cases. In view of the aforesaid findings, AO proceeded to compute the amount of disallowance as per formula prescribed in Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules. The AO proceeded to make a f…

Mohair Investment and Trading Company (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 4677/DEL/2009[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2015AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate and Bhavita Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Dam Kanunjna, Senior DR
Section 115Section 143Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 275(1)(a)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘E’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.4677/Del./2009 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02) M/s. Mohair Investment and Trading vs. DCIT, Circle 5 (1), Company (P) Limited, New Delhi. 15, Aurangzeb Road, New Delhi – 110 011. (PAN : AAACM0345D) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Gaurav Jain, Advocate and Bhavita Kumar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri P. Dam Kanunjna, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 02.09.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 27.11.2015 O R D E R PER A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal, at the in…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 25, Mumbai vs. Patel Engineering Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of revenue is dismissed, whereas cross objection of the assessee is allowed in part, in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 6605/MUM/2013[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Nov 2015AY 2005-06
For Appellant: Shri Mayur KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Deepkant Prasad
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 234DSection 80Section 80ISection 80l

…ar Limited 74 ITR 723 (Born). • Wimco Seedlings Ltd. vs. OCIT 107 ITO 267 (Del.) It was further pointed out that the facts of following decisions are distinguishable from the facts of the appellant's case: & CO No.9/15 • ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. 108 ITD 457 • Everplus Securities & Finance Ltd. v. DCIT 101 ITD 151 • DCIT v. SG Investments & industries Ltd. 89 ITD 44 17. We have considered rival contentions and found that a clear finding has been given by the CIT(A) to the effect that amount was receivable on account of hire charges on machinery from JV or on account of assessee’s share in the JV firm…