ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.

165 ITD 27Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#55 most cited

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

No disallowance under section 14A can be made while computing book profits under section 115JB unless the expenditure is debited to the profit and loss account and satisfies clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2).

882

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 371,239 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. · Section 14A disallowance · Section 115JB book profits · MAT computation · expenditure for exempt income · Explanation 1 to Section 115JB(2)(f) · debit to profit and loss account · Vireet Investment Special Bench

Also reported as

58 ITR (Trib) 313

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 115JBSection 143(3)Section 1961Section 8DSection 37(1)Section 250Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 115jb(2)section 14a(2)strategic investmentbook profitscorporate guaranteesection 115jdisallowance under section 14adisallowance of interest expendituresection 115jbdisallowance u/s 14asection 92bsection 14a

Judgments citing ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd.

T vs. Logistics Services Limited, Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as

ITA 2906/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2906/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Tvs Logistics Services Ltd. Income Tax, 10, Jawahar Road, Chokkikulam, Corporate Circle-2 Madurai-625 002. Madurai. Pan: Aacct 1412E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1927/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs M/S. Tvs Logistics Services The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd. Corporate Circle-2 10,Jawahar Road, Madurai. Chokkikulam, Madurai-625 002. Pan: Aacct 1412E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.G.Johnson, Addl.CIT
Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद%य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI G.MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2906/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. TVS Logistics Services Ltd. Income Tax, 10, Jawahar Road, Chokkikulam, Corporate Circle-2 Madurai-625 002. Madurai. PAN: AACCT 1412E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1927/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs M/s. TVS Logis…

ACIT Corporate Circle 2, Madurai vs. Tvs Logistics Services Ltd., Madurai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as

ITA 1927/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai09 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2906/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of M/S. Tvs Logistics Services Ltd. Income Tax, 10, Jawahar Road, Chokkikulam, Corporate Circle-2 Madurai-625 002. Madurai. Pan: Aacct 1412E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1927/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs M/S. Tvs Logistics Services The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltd. Corporate Circle-2 10,Jawahar Road, Madurai. Chokkikulam, Madurai-625 002. Pan: Aacct 1412E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.G.Johnson, Addl.CIT
Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण,‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी महावीर "संह, उपा"य" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद%य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI G.MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.2906/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs The Deputy Commissioner of M/s. TVS Logistics Services Ltd. Income Tax, 10, Jawahar Road, Chokkikulam, Corporate Circle-2 Madurai-625 002. Madurai. PAN: AACCT 1412E (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.No.1927/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Vs M/s. TVS Logis…

Tamilnadu Mercantile Bank Ltd., Tuticorin vs. ACIT, Tuticorin

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in I

ITA 864/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.864/Chny/2019 Assessment Year: 2012 – 2013 M/S. Tamilnad Mercantile Bank Ltd., The Assistant Commissioner Of No.57, V.E. Road, Income Tax, Tuticorin – 628 002. Vs. Circle – 1, Tuticorin – 628 001. [Pan: Aaact 5558K] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) Mr. S. Sridhar, Advocate अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. Suresh Periasamy, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 15.07.2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 30.07.2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao:

For Respondent: Mr. Suresh Periasamy, JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…e company, if the interest-free funds are sufficient to meet the investments” . As regards, disallowance of other expenses, Section 14A r.w.R.8D(2)(iii), the Delhi Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment Private Limited [2017] 165 ITD 27 wherein has held that “only those investments are to be I.T.A No.864/Chny/2019 :- 12 -: considered for computing the average value of investment which yielded exempt income during the year.” 21. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed to consider only those investments which yield exempt income for the year under consideration is to be con…

Manali Petrochemicals Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Ltu-1, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is treated as

ITA 2824/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.2824/Chny/2019 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. Manali Petro Chemicals Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Spic House, 88 Mount Road, Income Tax, Guindy, Chennai -600 032. Large Tax Payer Unit-1 Chennai. Pan: Aaacm 3404D (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…he decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s. ACB India Ltd. Vs ACIT, reported in 374 ITR 108. This proposition is further supported by the decision of ITAT., Delhi Special Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt.Ltd., reported in 165 ITD 27 . Therefore, we are of the considered view that issue needs to be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer in light of averments made by the 6 assessee that it has sufficient own funds to cover investments made in shares and securities and further, the Assessing Officer has considered total investments including investments which does not yield…

Pnnj Industries P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO, W-15(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed in terms indicated above

ITA 1131/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Narayan AtalFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA no.1131/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) ITA no.1132/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) M/s. PN NJ Industries Pvt. Ltd. Plot no.A–470/ITC Industrial Area MICA Mahape, P.O. Ghansoli ……………. Appellant Navi Mumbai 400 701 PAN – AACCS1519B v/s Income Tax Officer ……………. Respondent Ward–15(2)(4), Mumbai Assessee by : Shri Narayan Atal Revenue by : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi Date of Hearing – 12.07.2021 Date of Order – 27.07.2021 O R D E R PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, A.M. T…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Express News Papers Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

ITA 710/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A No.710/Chny/2018 Assessment Year: 2013 - 2014

For Appellant: Mr. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mr. G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 14ASection 14A(1)

…vide I.T.A. No.1483/Chny/2019 by order dated 29.11.2019 by following the decision of the Delhi Special Bench of this I.T.A No.710Chny/2018 & C.O. No.65/Chny/2018 :- 8 -: Tribunal and in the case of ACIT Vs Vireet Investment Private Limited [2017] reported in 165 ITD 27 directed the Assessing Officer to find out the investment which yielded exempt income during the year under consideration and directed the Assessing Officer to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. 8. He also relied upon the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Shriram Ownership…

Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Cent. Cir. 46 (Now DCIT - CC -8(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 308/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2021AY 2013-14
Section 143(3)Section 92B

…faulted with. The only dispute before us is with regard to disallowance made under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules. We M/s. Rosy Blue (India) Pvt. Ltd., find that the Hon’ble Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investments reported in 165 ITD 27 had held that only those investments which had yielded exempt income to the assessee during the year alone should be considered for the purpose of making the disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules. Respectfully following the same, we hereby direct the ld. AO to consider only the investments of Rs.40,01,64,994/- and apply 0.5% thereon for…

Paresh N. Bhagat, Mumbai vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax-24(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5293/MUM/2019[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri M. Balaganesh () Assessment Year: 2011-12 & Assessment Year: 2012-13 Paresh N. Bhagat, Addl. Commissioner Of Income 501, Heritage Plaza, Jp Road, Opp. Vs. Tax Range-20(2), Indian Oil Company, Andheri (W), Aayakarbhavan, Mumbai Mumbai-400053. [Now Lying With Asst.Cit- 4(3)(2), Mumbai] Pan No. Aabpb 1073 B Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Jigar Mehta, Ar Revenue By : Ms.Shreekalapardeshi, Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/06/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 01/07/2021

For Appellant: Mr. Jigar Mehta, ARFor Respondent: Ms.ShreekalaPardeshi, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…r Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, we hereby direct the Ld. AO to consider only dividend bearing investments for the purpose of working out the disallowance in the light of decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investments reported in 165 ITD 27. We further direct the Ld. AO that the said disallowance in any case shall not exceed the exempt income and also shall not exceed the total expenses claimed as deduction by the assessee. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes in view of the abovementioned directions. 3. In the result, both the a…

ACIT (OSD) RG. 8(1), Mumbai vs. Capital First Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue and Cross Objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4109/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jul 2021AY 2010-11
Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…First Bank Ltd investments which had actually yielded exempt income to the assessee and re-compute the disallowance accordingly. This would be in line with the decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Vireet Investments reported in 165 ITD 27. 4.6. Accordingly, we deem it fit to restore this issue to the file of the ld. AO to decide the issue of disallowance in the light of the above mentioned directions. The ld. AO is also directed to reduce Rs.12 lakhs being the voluntary disallowance made by the assessee from the amount of disallowance recomputed as above. 5. In the result, appeal…

Bajaj Finserv Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Large Texpayer Unit, Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for AY

ITA 4223/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Bajaj Finserv Limited, बनाम/ The Deputy Commissioner 226,Bajaj Bhawan, Of Income Tax – Large Vs. 2 Flr,Jamnalal Bajaj Marg Taxpayer Unit, Nariman Point, Mumbai Mumbai - 400021 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aadcb2924N .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Percy j Pardiwalla, ARFor Respondent: Shri Shishir Dhamija, CIT DR
Section 143Section 14ASection 244ASection 80

…istrative overheads based on total income and exempted dividend income.Further if the disallowance u/sec14A of the Act is worked out, the A.O. has to apply the ratio of special bench decision in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s. Vireet Investments Pvt Ltd. New Delhi (165 ITD 27). Where the Coordinate Bench has made a ITA Nos. 4223/Mum/2012 & 4955/Mum/2013 Bajaj Finserv Ltd. distinctive observations on the investments and only dividend yielding investments has to be considered for the purpose of Average value of investments for disallowance u/s 8D(2)(iii). Accordingly, we set aside the order of the CIT(A) on this dispute…

Hbl Power Systems Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad

Appeal is allowed in above terms

ITA 2177/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad23 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Srinivas Maddury, ARFor Respondent: Shri Narayana Murthy Naik, DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

…delete the impugned ALP adjustment for this precise reason alone. 5. Next comes Section 14A r.w.s.115JB MAT computation involving sum of Rs.6,76,51,670/-. Suffice to say, this tribunal’s Special Bench’s decision in ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment P. Ltd., (2017) [165 ITD 27] (Delhi) (SB) has already settled the issue that such a disallowance does not form part of book profits computed u/s.115JB of the Act. Ordered accordingly. 6. This assessee’s appeal is allowed in above terms. Order pronounced in the open court on 23rd June, 2021 (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) JUDICIAL MEMBER Hyderabad, Dated: 23-06-2021 TNMM :- 4 -: Copy…

DCIT Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai vs. Sundaram Clayton Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue and the assessee

ITA 1376/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Respondent: Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan
Section 14ASection 251(1)(a)Section 260ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 35

…o recompute disallowance of other expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(iii) by considering only those investments which earned exempt income for the year by following the decision of ITAT., Delhi Special Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt .Ltd. ( 165 ITD 27)(SB ) . 8. The learned DR, on the other hand, submitted that although the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by decision of the ITAT, Chennai in assessee’s own case, but fact remains that assessee itself has computed suo motu disallowances of direct expenditure of Rs.42.49 lakhs in the original return of income filed for relevant assess…

Sundaram Clayton Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue and the assessee

ITA 1356/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Respondent: Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan
Section 14ASection 251(1)(a)Section 260ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 35

…o recompute disallowance of other expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(iii) by considering only those investments which earned exempt income for the year by following the decision of ITAT., Delhi Special Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt .Ltd. ( 165 ITD 27)(SB ) . 8. The learned DR, on the other hand, submitted that although the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by decision of the ITAT, Chennai in assessee’s own case, but fact remains that assessee itself has computed suo motu disallowances of direct expenditure of Rs.42.49 lakhs in the original return of income filed for relevant assess…

Sundaram Clayton Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue and the assessee

ITA 1355/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Respondent: Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan
Section 14ASection 251(1)(a)Section 260ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 35

…o recompute disallowance of other expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(iii) by considering only those investments which earned exempt income for the year by following the decision of ITAT., Delhi Special Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt .Ltd. ( 165 ITD 27)(SB ) . 8. The learned DR, on the other hand, submitted that although the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by decision of the ITAT, Chennai in assessee’s own case, but fact remains that assessee itself has computed suo motu disallowances of direct expenditure of Rs.42.49 lakhs in the original return of income filed for relevant assess…

DCIT Corporate Circle 6(2), Chennai vs. Sundaram Clayton Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeals filed by Revenue and the assessee

ITA 1254/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Jun 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Respondent: Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan
Section 14ASection 251(1)(a)Section 260ASection 32(1)(iia)Section 35

…o recompute disallowance of other expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(iii) by considering only those investments which earned exempt income for the year by following the decision of ITAT., Delhi Special Bench in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt .Ltd. ( 165 ITD 27)(SB ) . 8. The learned DR, on the other hand, submitted that although the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by decision of the ITAT, Chennai in assessee’s own case, but fact remains that assessee itself has computed suo motu disallowances of direct expenditure of Rs.42.49 lakhs in the original return of income filed for relevant assess…

Bajaj Holdings & Investment Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Large Texpayer Unit, Mumbai

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

ITA 4224/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 May 2021AY 2008-09
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…8D(2) of the Rules while computing book profits u/s.115JB of the Act. 5.1. We have heard rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. We find that the Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investments reported in 165 ITD 27 had held that the computation mechanism provided under Rule 8D(2) of the Rules cannot be made applicable for working out the disallowance under Clause(f) of Explanation 1 to Section 115JB (2) of the Act. However, the actual expenses incurred thereon which are attributable to earning of exempt income need to be disallowed under the same clause (f).…

Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd., Ludhiana vs. ACIT, C-7, Ludhiana

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2014-

ITA 1160/CHANDI/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh06 May 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri R.L. Negiआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos. 1160/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Navdeep Sharma, Advocate
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, “B” CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI N.K. SAINI, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI R.L. NEGI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos. 1160/Chd/2019 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Nahar Spinning Mills बनाम Asstt. Commissioner Income Tax, Ltd.,373, Industrial Area-A Circle-7, Aayakar Bhawan, Rishi Ludhiana. Nagar, Ludhiana. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACN5710D अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Hearing through video Conferencing "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee by : Shri Navdeep Sharma, Advocate राज"व क" ओर से/ Revenue by Sh. Ashok Kumar, Addl. CIT सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing…

M/S Sinnar Thermal Power Ltd(Formerly Rattanindia Nasik Power Ltd), Delhi vs. Dy CIT CC 6 (4), Mumbai

ITA 252/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 May 2021AY 2016-17
Section 143(3)

…years. 9.1. We find that the ld CITA had deleted the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act while computing book profits u/s 115JB of the Act by following the order of the Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Vireet Investments Pvt Ltd reported in 165 ITD 27. Pursuant to the relief granted by the ld CITA, the revenue is in appeal before us for various assessment years for various companies. We are any way not concerned with the disallowance made for the Asst Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 in the M/s. Sinnar Thermal Power Limited (Formerly Rattanindia Nasik Power Limited) case of Rattanindia Power Ltd ; Asst…

K Raheja Corp P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(2), Mumbai

The appeal stand partly allowed

ITA 7463/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 May 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकरअपील िं./ I.T.A. No.7463/Mum/2016 (धििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2012-13) K. Raheja Corp. Private Ltd. Dcit–Cc-4(2) Raheja Tower Mumbai. बिाम/ Plot No.C-30, G Block Vs. Opp. Sidbi, Bandra Kurla Complex Bandra East, Mumbai-400 051 स्थायीलेखा िं./ जीआइआर िं./ Pan/Gir No. Aaacp-0522-B (अपीलाथी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Percy Pardiwala (Ld. Sr. Counsel) & Ms. Aarati Sathe (Ld. Ar) Revenue By : Shri Jayant Jhaveri-Ld.Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख/ : 04/03/2021 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 03/05/2021 Date Of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal () 1. Aforesaid Appeal By Assessee For Assessment Year [In Short Referred To As ‘Ay’] 2012-13 Contest The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-52, Mumbai, [In Short Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’], Appeal No. Cit(A)-52/It/Dc-Cc-4(2)/300/2015-16 Dated 30/09/2016 On Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala (Ld. SrFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Jhaveri-Ld.CIT-DR
Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…, we find that the computation mechanism provided in rule 8D(2) of the rules cannot be imputed into clause (f) to Explanation 1 to Section 115JB(2) of the Act as held by the Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. reported in 165 ITD 27.However, the ld. AO is directed to consider the disallowance of expenses incurred for the purpose of earning exempt income based on actual amounts debited to profit & loss account. This directions is also given in the light of the decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal supra. Accordingly, the additional ground raised by the assessee is allowe…

DCIT-14(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Infrastructure, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1704/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Apr 2021AY 2015-16
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14A

…d. CIT(A) had only directed the ld. AO to consider only investments which had actually yielded exempt income. This we find is in consonance with the decision of the Hon’ble Special Bench decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investments reported in 165 ITD 27 and hence, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) granting relief to the assessee in this regard. Accordingly, we direct the ld. AO to consider only those investments which had actually yielded exempt income for the purpose of making disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules and recompute the disallowance accordingly and…