What is ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance computed under Section 14A, read with Rule 8D, cannot be added to book profits under Section 115JB for Minimum Alternate Tax (MAT) purposes. Additionally, for Section 14A disallowance, only investments that yielded exempt income during the year are considered for calculating their average value.

How many judgments cite ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.?

789 judgments on BharatTax cite ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. (82 Taxmann.com 415), spanning 2017 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 115JB, Section 143(3), Section 8D, Section 250, Section 37(1).

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. (82 Taxmann.com 415)

M/S. Jai Corp Ltd., Mumbai vs. Dy CIT -Circle-6(4), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 1140/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Asst. Cit-3(2)(1) M/S. Jai Corporation Ltd. Room No. 674, 6Th Floor, H-B, Mittal Tower, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Free Press Journal Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021

For Respondent: Shri Vranda U. Matkarni

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…r disallowance from the interest expenses 5.5 With regard to disallowance under Rule 8D(2) ü) which is 0.5% of the average value of the investment, reliance is placed on the decision of Special Bench of ITAT. Delhi, in the case of Vireet Investments (P) Ltd. [82 Taxmann.com 415(2017)] wherein it was held that only those investments which had yielded exempt income should be considered for computing the disallowance under Rule 8D. Therefore, the AO is directed to re-compute the disallowance u/s.14A by considering the investment, which yielded exempt income. After verification of working of disallowance submitted by…

Asstt. CIT - 3(2)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Jal Corp. Ltd., Nynvau

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue and assessee are dismissed

ITA 1872/MUM/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm Asst. Cit-3(2)(1) M/S. Jai Corporation Ltd. Room No. 674, 6Th Floor, H-B, Mittal Tower, Aayakar Bhavan, M. K. Road, Vs. Free Press Journal Marg, Mumbai-400 020 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021

For Respondent: Shri Vranda U. Matkarni

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…r disallowance from the interest expenses 5.5 With regard to disallowance under Rule 8D(2) ü) which is 0.5% of the average value of the investment, reliance is placed on the decision of Special Bench of ITAT. Delhi, in the case of Vireet Investments (P) Ltd. [82 Taxmann.com 415(2017)] wherein it was held that only those investments which had yielded exempt income should be considered for computing the disallowance under Rule 8D. Therefore, the AO is directed to re-compute the disallowance u/s.14A by considering the investment, which yielded exempt income. After verification of working of disallowance submitted by…

M/S. E-Infochips Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The ACIT, Circle-4, Ahmedabad

In the result, ground number 3 and 4 of the assessee’s appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 417/AHD/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH Before: Shri Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member And Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal, Judicial Member Assessment Year 2008-09 e-infochips Ltd., ACIT, 11/A-B, Chandra Colony, Circle-4, Off. C.G. Road, Vs Ahmedabad Ahmedabad (Respondent) PAN: AACCS1310E (Appellant) Assessee by: Shri S.N. Soparkar, A.R. & Shri Parin Shah, A.R. Revenue by: Shri Atul Pandey, Sr. D.R. Date of hearing : 19-10-2022 Date of pronouncement : 20-12-2022 आदेश/ORDER PER : SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. Commiss…

Raymond Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT (OSD) RG 2(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, the same are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 4322/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleraymond Limited V. The Addl. Cit– 2(3) New Hind House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Narottam Morarjee Marg Mumbai - 400020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 287/Mum/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 2218/Mum/2011 (A.Y. 2007-08)] The Addl. Cit– 2(3) V. Raymond Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road New Hind House Mumbai - 400020 Narottam Morarjee Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A Appellant Respondent M/S. Raymond Limited V. The Dcit – Osd- 2(3) New Hind House, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Narottam Morarjee Marg Mumbai – 400020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Raymond Limited v. The Addl. CIT– 2(3) New Hind House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Narottam Morarjee Marg Mumbai - 400020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 PAN: AAACR4896A Appellant Respondent C.O. NO. 287/MUM/2017 [ARISING OUT OF ITA No. 2218/MUM/2011 (A.Y. 2007-08)] The Addl. CIT– 2(3) v. Raymond Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road New Hind House Mumbai - 400020 Narottam Morarjee Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 PAN: AAACR4896A Appellant Respondent…

Raymond Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(3), Mumbai

Accordingly, the same are dismissed as not pressed

ITA 2218/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Dec 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Bleraymond Limited V. The Addl. Cit– 2(3) New Hind House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Narottam Morarjee Marg Mumbai - 400020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A Appellant Respondent C.O. No. 287/Mum/2017 [Arising Out Of Ita No. 2218/Mum/2011 (A.Y. 2007-08)] The Addl. Cit– 2(3) V. Raymond Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road New Hind House Mumbai - 400020 Narottam Morarjee Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A Appellant Respondent M/S. Raymond Limited V. The Dcit – Osd- 2(3) New Hind House, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Narottam Morarjee Marg Mumbai – 400020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aaacr4896A Appellant Respondent

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, HON'BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, HON'BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Raymond Limited v. The Addl. CIT– 2(3) New Hind House Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Narottam Morarjee Marg Mumbai - 400020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 PAN: AAACR4896A Appellant Respondent C.O. NO. 287/MUM/2017 [ARISING OUT OF ITA No. 2218/MUM/2011 (A.Y. 2007-08)] The Addl. CIT– 2(3) v. Raymond Limited Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road New Hind House Mumbai - 400020 Narottam Morarjee Marg Ballard Estate, Mumbai - 400001 PAN: AAACR4896A Appellant Respondent…

DCIT, Chennai vs. M/S. Allsec Technologies Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 421/CHNY/2019[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Dec 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri D. Hema Bhupal (JCIT) –Ld. Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 195Section 195(1)Section 40

…nts which actually yielded exempt income during the year. Aggrieved, the revenue is in further appeal before us. 3.2 We find that the directions of Ld. CIT(A) are in accordance with the decision of Special Bench of ITAT in ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd. 82 Taxmann.com 415. Therefore, the impugned order could not be faulted with. We order so. The corresponding grounds raised by revenue stand dismissed. 4. In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed. Order pronounced on 08th December, 2022. (MAHAVIR SINGH) (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) उपा12 /VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद: /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे*ई/ Chennai; िदन…

Navin Flurine International, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 7(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is fully dismissed

ITA 6532/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Ms. Aarti Vissanji &For Respondent: Sh. Manoj Kumar Sinha, DR

Section 115JSection 14ASection 35Section 41(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “B”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI ABY T VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 6533/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2013-14) Navin Fluorine International Ltd. Suntech Centre, 2nd Floor, 37/40, Subhash Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai- 400 057. PAN: AABCP0464B ...... Appellant Vs. Dy.CIT-7(3)(1), Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020. ..... Respondent ITA No. 6816/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2013-14) Dy.CIT-10(3)(1), Room No. 217/212, 1st Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai- 400 020. ..... Appellant Vs. Navin Fluorine International Ltd. Suntech Centre, 2nd Floor, 37…

Sasken Technologies Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 404/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 404/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Sasken Technologies Ltd., (Formerly Known As The Deputy Sasken Communication Commissioner Of Technologies Ltd.), Income Tax, No. 139/25, Domlur Circle – 6(1)(1), Ring Road, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 071. Pan: Aaecs6424R Appellant Respondent : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Assessee By Ca : Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, Jcit Revenue By Dr Itat Date Of Hearing : 15-11-2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 30-11-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Is Filed By Assessee Against The Assessment Order Dated 31.01.2017 Passed By Ld.Dcit, Circle – 6(1)(1), Bangalore For A.Y. 2012-13 On Following Concise Grounds Of Appeal: “1. General:- The Learned Ao & The Drp Erred In Passing The Order / Directions In The Manner Passed By Them. The Orders Passed Being Bad In Law Is Liable To Be Quashed.

For Respondent: Shri Padam Chand Khincha

Section 133(6)Section 2(24)Section 92BSection 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER IT(TP)A No. 404/Bang/2017 Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s. Sasken Technologies Ltd., (Formerly known as The Deputy Sasken Communication Commissioner of Technologies Ltd.), Income Tax, No. 139/25, Domlur Circle – 6(1)(1), Ring Road, Vs. Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 071. PAN: AAECS6424R APPELLANT RESPONDENT : Shri Padam Chand Khincha, Assessee by CA : Shri K. Sankar Ganesh, JCIT Revenue by DR ITAT Date of Hearing : 15-11-2022 Date of Pronouncement : 30-11-2022 ORDER PER BEENA…