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 370,744 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.

ACIT 1(2)-2, Mumbai vs. Nocil Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5650/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sandeep Gosaina C I T - 1(2)-2 M/S. Nocil Limited Room No. 535, 5Th Floor Mafatlal House, 3Rd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. H.T. Parekh Mahal Mumbai 400020 Backbay Reclamation Mumbai 400 020 Pan – Aaacn4412E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T.A. KhanFor Respondent: Ms. Arati Vissanji
Section 14ASection 72A(4)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri G.S. Pannu, Accountant Member and Shri Sandeep Gosain, Judicial Member A C I T - 1(2)-2 M/s. NOCIL Limited Room No. 535, 5th Floor Mafatlal House, 3rd Floor Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Vs. H.T. Parekh Mahal Mumbai 400020 Backbay Reclamation Mumbai 400 020 PAN – AAACN4412E Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri T.A. Khan Respondent by: Ms. Arati Vissanji Date of Hearing: 07.03.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 30 .05.2018 O R D E R Per G.S. Pannu, AM This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Mumbai dated 30.09.2015…

Babcock Borsig Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5(2), Kolkata

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the revenue are partly allowed

ITA 512/KOL/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2018AY 2012-2013

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.472/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Akkal Dudhwewala, FCAFor Respondent: Shri G.Hanshing, CIT, DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…are allowed. 2.5.1. With regard to disallowance u/s 14A of the Act while computing the book profits u/s 115JB of the Act, the issue is settled by the recent special bench decision of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs Vireet Investment (P) Ltd reported in 165 ITD 27 5 M/s Babcock Borsig Ltd. A.Yr.2012-13 (Delhi)(Special Bench) dated 16.6.2017 , wherein in para 6.22 of the said judgement, it has been held that the computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2). is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated u/s 14A read with Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules, 1962. We find…

DCIT, Circle-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Shree Capital Services Ltd., Kolkata

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

ITA 1835/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1835/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Navin Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri A.T.Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No.1835/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 D.C.I.T., Circle-5 (1) . -vs.- Shree Capital Services Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AAGCS 5082 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No.1808/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shree Capital Services Ltd. -vs- D.C.I.T., Circle-5(1), Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AAGCS 5082 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Department : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, For the Assessee : Shri Navin Verma, AR Date of Hearing : 07.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 15 .05.201…

Shree Capital Services Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5, Kolkata

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

ITA 1808/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri A.T.Varkey, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] I.T.A No.1835/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Navin Verma, ARFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH : KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri A.T.Varkey, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] I.T.A No.1835/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 D.C.I.T., Circle-5 (1) . -vs.- Shree Capital Services Ltd. Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AAGCS 5082 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) I.T.A No.1808/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Shree Capital Services Ltd. -vs- D.C.I.T., Circle-5(1), Kolkata Kolkata [PAN : AAGCS 5082 D] (Respondent) (Appellant) For the Department : Shri Saurabh Kumar, Addl. CIT, For the Assessee : Shri Navin Verma, AR Date of Hearing : 07.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 15 .05.201…

N.Nagaraj Ballal, Udupi vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-2, Udupi

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

ITA 840/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 May 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaassessment Year :2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kumar .H, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Padma Meenakshi, JCIT (DR)
Section 14A

…4/- as per working submitted by him along with the summary of submissions made before the Tribunal. In this regard, he placed reliance on an order of the Special bench of the tribunal rendered in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 165 ITD 27.He submitted that as per this working, only the shares of those three companies should be considered from whom the assessee has received dividend income which is exempt which is forming part of the books of the assessee. He pointed out that such investment is only of Rs. 1,54,200/- and therefore, the working of disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.Rule 8D sh…

DCIT 4(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bharat J Patel, Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1578/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri V.G. GindeFor Respondent: Shri B. Sriniwas
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…puting the average investments and disallowance under Rule 8D2(iii) and non-dividend yielding investments shall be excluded for computing the disallowance, in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited [165 ITD 27]. 4. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer. 3 ITA.No. 1513, 1514 & 1578/MUM/2016 Shri Bharat Jayantilal Patel 5. On hearing both the sides and in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited (supra), we direct the Assessing Officer to recompute the disallowance unde…

Prashant Jayantilal Patel, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1515/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri V.G. GindeFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshan

…The only submission of the assessee is that, only the dividend yielding investments should be considered for computing the disallowance under Rule 8D2(iii) in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited [165 ITD 27]. 8. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer. 9. On hearing both the sides and pursuant to the orders of the Authorities below, we direct the Assessing Officer to recompute the disallowance under 14A r.w. Rule 8D2(iii) only considering the dividend yielding investment in tax free securities following the decision of the S…

Bharat Jayantilal Patel, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 4(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1514/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri V.G. GindeFor Respondent: Shri B. Sriniwas
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…puting the average investments and disallowance under Rule 8D2(iii) and non-dividend yielding investments shall be excluded for computing the disallowance, in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited [165 ITD 27]. 4. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer. 3 ITA.No. 1513, 1514 & 1578/MUM/2016 Shri Bharat Jayantilal Patel 5. On hearing both the sides and in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited (supra), we direct the Assessing Officer to recompute the disallowance unde…

Bharat Jayantilal Patel, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1513/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri V.G. GindeFor Respondent: Shri B. Sriniwas
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…puting the average investments and disallowance under Rule 8D2(iii) and non-dividend yielding investments shall be excluded for computing the disallowance, in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited [165 ITD 27]. 4. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer. 3 ITA.No. 1513, 1514 & 1578/MUM/2016 Shri Bharat Jayantilal Patel 5. On hearing both the sides and in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited (supra), we direct the Assessing Officer to recompute the disallowance unde…

ITO 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Aristo Realty Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4669/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Income Tax Officer-6(1)(2), M/S Aristo Reality R. No. 508, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Vs. Development Ltd. Bhavan, M.K. Road, 601, Symphony Mumbai-400020. Nehru Road, Vile Parle (E), Mumbai-400057 Pan No. Aaacl0593J Appellant Respondent Revenue By : Ms. Aarju Garodia, Dr Assessee By : Mr. Dilip Lakhani, Ar Date Of Hearing : 13/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Dilip Lakhani, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Aarju Garodia, DR
Section 143

…1 for purpose of calculating the MAT u/s 115JB of the Act without considering. 15. We find that the above ground has to be decided in favour of the assessee in view of the order of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in ACIT v. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. (2017) 165 ITD 27 (Delhi-Trib.) (SB), wherein it has been held that computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D. We follow the above M/s Aristo Reality 11 order and delete the addition of Rs.2,19,037/- made by the AO u/s 14A to the book profit of the assessee.…

Juniper Hotels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT WD 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 4273/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S Juniper Hotels P. Ltd. Addl. Commissioner Off Western Express Of Income Tax-10(1) Vs. Highway, Santacruz (E) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Mumbai-400055. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaecs6336E Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Sunil Bhandari, Ar Revenue By : Ms. Arju Garodia, Dr Date Of Hearing : 12/03/2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 18/04/2018

For Appellant: Mr. Sunil Bhandari, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Arju Garodia, DR
Section 10(33)Section 115JSection 133(6)Section 143Section 14A

…Ltd (supra). Thus the 2nd ground of appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. As the matter has been restored to file of the AO, we are not adverting to the decisions relied on by the Ld. counsel and Ld. DR. 4.5 In ACIT v. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. (2017) 165 ITD 27 (Delhi- Trib.) (SB), it has been held that computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to computation as contemplated u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D. We follow the above M/s Juniper Hotels 8 order and delete the addition of Rs.6,08,600/- made by the AO u/s 14A to the book profit of the assessee computed…

Zee Media Corporation Limited, Mumbai vs. Addll.CIT -RG.7(3), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2695/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Ramit Kochar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari
Section 133(6)Section 154

…of accounts and for decision, keeping in view the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (supra), HDFC Bank [366 ITR 505] and Special Bench decision in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited [165 ITD 27] thus, we restore this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer and to decide the issue keeping in view the decisions and after verification of the accounts of the assessee. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. If 12 ITA.NO.2166 & 2695/MUM/2016 (A.Y.2011-12) M/s. Zee Media Co…

ACIT 8(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Zee Media Corporation Ltd. (Formerly Known As Zee News Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2166/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Ramit Kochar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari
Section 133(6)Section 154

…of accounts and for decision, keeping in view the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. (supra), HDFC Bank [366 ITR 505] and Special Bench decision in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited [165 ITD 27] thus, we restore this matter to the file of the Assessing Officer and to decide the issue keeping in view the decisions and after verification of the accounts of the assessee. Needless to say that the Assessing Officer shall give adequate opportunity of being heard to the assessee. If 12 ITA.NO.2166 & 2695/MUM/2016 (A.Y.2011-12) M/s. Zee Media Co…

Ansh Merchandise P Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 6458/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Apr 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6458/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Ansh Merchandise Private Dcit 5(2) Ltd, Aayakar Bhavan, Office No. 211, Balaji Arcade Mumbai-400020 V. Near Sejal Glass, S.V. Road, Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400067 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcn8176E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Dr. K. Shivaram &For Respondent: Shri. R.P Meena ,CIT-DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6458/Mum/2014 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2010-11) बिाम/ Ansh Merchandise Private DCIT 5(2) Ltd, Aayakar Bhavan, Office No. 211, Balaji Arcade Mumbai-400020 v. Near Sejal Glass, S.V. Road, Kandivali (W), Mumbai-400067 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AABCN8176E (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. Assessee by: Dr. K. Shivaram & Shri. Rahul Hakani Revenue by : Shri. R.P Meena ,CIT-DR सुनवाई की तारीख /…

Pacific Plantations Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle-5, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1643/KOL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1643/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2008-09 Pacific Plantations Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-5, Kolkata [Pan: Aabcp 5418 P] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R.K. Patodi, FCAFor Respondent: Shri A. Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 48

…15JB of the Act could be made by applying the computation mechanism provided in Rule 8D(2) of the Rules. This issue has been duly settled by the recent decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. reported in 165 ITD 27 (Delhi Special Bench) dated 16.06.2017 wherein it was held that the provisions of Rule 8D of the Rules cannot be applied while computing the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act vis-a-vis computation of book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. It was held that the disallowance u/s 14A need to be made only based on the books of accounts of the assessee by ide…

M/S. Maa Group Holdings Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1)(3), Bengaluru

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

ITA 2584/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaassessment Year :2011-12

For Appellant: Shri R.E. Subramanian, CAFor Respondent: Shri B.R. Ramesh, JCIT (DR)
Section 14ASection 154

…and the other investments should be ignored for the purpose of computing disallowance u/s. 14A r.w.Rule 8D, we find that the ld. AR of assessee has placed reliance on a Tribunal order rendered in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 58 ITR (Trib) 313 (ITAT(Del)), copy available on pages 33 to 94 of case law compilation. In the said Tribunal order, we find that in para 10 of this Tribunal order, the Tribunal has duly considered the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) and also the judgment of Hon’ble Apex C…

DCIT, Chandigarh vs. M/S Spray Engineering Devices Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 369/CHANDI/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh03 Apr 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh, Sr.DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 80I

…ncome of the assessee under the MAT provisions of section 115JB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The issue has now been decided in favour of the assessee by the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ‘ACIT v Vireet Industries Pvt Ltd.’ 165 ITD 27 (Delhi)(SB). No contrary decision has been cited by the Ld. DR. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) on this issue. 7. Vide ground No.3, the Revenue has agitated the action of the CIT(A) in allowing the claim of the assessee u/s 80IB and 80IC of the Act on the profits from annual maintenance charges and…

ACIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Bombay Dyeing & Manufacturing Co, . Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground of appeal raised by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6055/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhacit -2(1) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Room No. 575, 5Th Floor, M.K. Vs. Marg, Ballard Estate, Road, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Acit -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit -2(1) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Acit -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Marg, Ballard Estate, Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar with MsFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (DR)
Section 14ASection 253Section 254(1)

…empt income. 58. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that this issue is covered in favour of assessee and against Revenue by the decision of Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Asstt. CIT v. Vireet Investments (P.) Ltd. [2017] 165 ITD 27/82 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi - Trib.) (SB) wherein the Tribunal has clearly held that no disallowance under section 14A of the Act r.w.r 8D of the Rules can be made while computing book profit under section 115JB of the Act. The learned CIT Departmental Representative could not controvert the above proposition. Accordingly, we are of the view that th…

Addl CIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Bombay Dyeing & Mfg Co. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground of appeal raised by Revenue is dismissed

ITA 557/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Apr 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma & Shri Pawan Singhacit -2(1) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Room No. 575, 5Th Floor, M.K. Vs. Marg, Ballard Estate, Road, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Acit -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit -2(1) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Room No. 561, 5Th Floor, Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Marg, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-20. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S Bombay Dyeing & Mfg. Co. Acit -2(1) Ltd. Neville House, J N Heredia Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-20. Marg, Ballard Estate, Vs. Mumbai-400001 Pan:Aaact2328K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh A. Thar with MsFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Deshpande (DR)
Section 14ASection 253Section 254(1)

…empt income. 58. At the outset, the learned Counsel for the assessee stated that this issue is covered in favour of assessee and against Revenue by the decision of Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Asstt. CIT v. Vireet Investments (P.) Ltd. [2017] 165 ITD 27/82 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi - Trib.) (SB) wherein the Tribunal has clearly held that no disallowance under section 14A of the Act r.w.r 8D of the Rules can be made while computing book profit under section 115JB of the Act. The learned CIT Departmental Representative could not controvert the above proposition. Accordingly, we are of the view that th…

DCIT Cen Cir 8(4), Mumbai vs. Savita Oil Technologies Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5410/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Feb 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri A.L. Sainidcit, Central Circle-8(4) M/S. Savita Oil Technologies Ltd. Room No. 658, 6Th Floor 66/67, Nariman Bhavan Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Nariman Point Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400021 Pan – Aaacs7934A Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri V. VidyadharFor Respondent: Shri Dharan Gandhi
Section 115JSection 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…ssued nor an opportunity is given to the assessee. Therefore the penalty of `51,499/- was levied by the CIT(A) without adhering to the principles of natural justice. Further, the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment P. Ltd. (58 ITR (Trib) 313) it has been held that the computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) is to be made without resorting to the computation as contemplated under Section 14A r.w. Rule 8D of I.T. Rules, 1962. The disallowance under Section 14A while computing book profit cannot be made applying the provisions of Rule 8D. 8. In the resul…