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.

M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 383/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 115JSection 144Section 2Section 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37Section 43BSection 80I

…gards Ground no.15, the Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) was not correct in deleting the adjustment of Rs.6,66,11,675/- made under Section 115JB of the Act. 46. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Special Bech in the case of Vireet Investments (P) Limited, 165 ITD 27, the same was approved by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of JJ Glastronics (P) Ltd. 446 ITR 712. 47. We have herd both the partis and perused all the relevant material available on record. As per the decision in the case of Vireet Investments (P) Limited (supra) and the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of JJ Gl…

The Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(2), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Cadila Pharmaceuticals Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 345/AHD/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad12 Nov 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand Vasant Mahadeokarassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 115JSection 144Section 2Section 35Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(vii)Section 37Section 43BSection 80I

…gards Ground no.15, the Ld. DR submitted that the CIT(A) was not correct in deleting the adjustment of Rs.6,66,11,675/- made under Section 115JB of the Act. 46. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Special Bech in the case of Vireet Investments (P) Limited, 165 ITD 27, the same was approved by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of JJ Glastronics (P) Ltd. 446 ITR 712. 47. We have herd both the partis and perused all the relevant material available on record. As per the decision in the case of Vireet Investments (P) Limited (supra) and the decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of JJ Gl…

Trustline Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, CC-3(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1180/CHNY/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Sept 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./ Ita No.1180/Chny/2024 (िनधा)रण वष) / Assessment Year: 2017-18) M/S. Trustline Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Dcit बनाम/ 39/19, Ii Floor, Aspen Court, Corporate Circle-3(1), Vi Main Road, R.A. Puram, Chennai. Vs. Chennai-600 028. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aacct-0398-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) : (" थ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ"कीओरसे/ Appellant By : Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate)-Ld. Ar " थ"कीओरसे/Respondent By : Ms. R. Anita (Addl.Cit) -Ld. Sr. Dr सुनवाईकीतारीख/Date Of Hearing : 19-09-2024 घोषणाकीतारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19-09-2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri N. Arjun Raj (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Ms. R. Anita (Addl.CIT) -Ld. Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…idered which have actually yielded any exempt income during the year. The computations, in that respect, have been placed in the paper-book. 3. Applying the ratio of Delhi Tribunal Special Bench decision in the case of M/s. Vireet Investments Private Limited (165 ITD 27), we accept the plea of Ld. AR and direct Ld. AO to re-compute the impugned disallowance by considering only those investments which have actually yielded any exempt income during the year. No other ground has been urged in the appeal. 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 19th September, 2024. (MAHAVIR SINGH)…

M/S. Cipla Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cent . Cir 1(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 1795/MUM/2021[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Sept 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Sunil Kumar Singh: A.Y : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar &For Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh
Section 35

…ssee had only requested before the Tribunal to set aside this issue to the file of the AO, meaning thereby, the assessee’s case before the Tribunal was restricted to the computation of disallowance u/s 14A r.w Rule 8D. In the case of Vireet Investments P Ltd (165 ITD 27)(Del SB) has held that , for the purpose of computing average value of investments, only those 8 Cipla Limited investments which have yielded exempt income alone should be considered. Following the same, we direct the AO to compute average value of investments by considering only those investments which have yielded exempt income and accordingly…

M/S. Bajaj Auto Ltd., Mumbai vs. Addl. CIT. RG. - 3(1), Mumbai

ITA 1496/MUM/2007[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Sept 2024AY 2003-2004
Section 115JSection 14ASection 250Section 35DSection 40Section 80H

…ons of the Act and also while computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act. In this regard, the Ld. Counsel of the Assessee placed reliance on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT Vs. M/s. Vireet Investments Pvt Ltd. (165 ITD 27) (Delhi - Trib.) (SB)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. The Ld. DR relied on the order of the Assessing Officer. 100. It is seen that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the…

The Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Special Range- 9, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 4413/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad & Sh. M Balaganeshaddl. Cit, Vs. M/S. The Hindustan Times Special Range – 9, Ltd., New Delhi 18-20, K. G. Marg, New Delhi – 110 001 Pan No. Aaact 4962 F (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2957 & 2956/Del/2017 (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2011-12) M/S. The Hindustan Times Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax 18-20, K. G. Marg, Circle 25(1), C.R. Building New Delhi – 110 001 New Delhi – 110 002 Pan No. Aaact 4962 F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…cts relevant for the purpose of adjudication of these grounds had already been considered ITA Nos. 4413, 2957 & 2956//Del/2017 The Hindustan Times Ltd. 6 hereinabove. The Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. reported in 165 ITD 27 (Del ITAT) (SB) had categorically held that computation mechanism provided in Rule 8D(2) of the Rules cannot be imputed in the book profit computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) of the Act . However, the direct expenses identified by the assessee in the sum of Rs.36,54,208/- as explained attributable to the earning of ex…

The Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2957/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad & Sh. M Balaganeshaddl. Cit, Vs. M/S. The Hindustan Times Special Range – 9, Ltd., New Delhi 18-20, K. G. Marg, New Delhi – 110 001 Pan No. Aaact 4962 F (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2957 & 2956/Del/2017 (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2011-12) M/S. The Hindustan Times Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax 18-20, K. G. Marg, Circle 25(1), C.R. Building New Delhi – 110 001 New Delhi – 110 002 Pan No. Aaact 4962 F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…cts relevant for the purpose of adjudication of these grounds had already been considered ITA Nos. 4413, 2957 & 2956//Del/2017 The Hindustan Times Ltd. 6 hereinabove. The Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. reported in 165 ITD 27 (Del ITAT) (SB) had categorically held that computation mechanism provided in Rule 8D(2) of the Rules cannot be imputed in the book profit computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) of the Act . However, the direct expenses identified by the assessee in the sum of Rs.36,54,208/- as explained attributable to the earning of ex…

The Hindustan Times Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee for A

ITA 2956/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Sh. Challa Nagendra Prasad & Sh. M Balaganeshaddl. Cit, Vs. M/S. The Hindustan Times Special Range – 9, Ltd., New Delhi 18-20, K. G. Marg, New Delhi – 110 001 Pan No. Aaact 4962 F (Appellant) (Respondent) & Ita Nos. 2957 & 2956/Del/2017 (Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2011-12) M/S. The Hindustan Times Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax 18-20, K. G. Marg, Circle 25(1), C.R. Building New Delhi – 110 001 New Delhi – 110 002 Pan No. Aaact 4962 F (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…cts relevant for the purpose of adjudication of these grounds had already been considered ITA Nos. 4413, 2957 & 2956//Del/2017 The Hindustan Times Ltd. 6 hereinabove. The Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. reported in 165 ITD 27 (Del ITAT) (SB) had categorically held that computation mechanism provided in Rule 8D(2) of the Rules cannot be imputed in the book profit computation under clause (f) of Explanation 1 to section 115JB(2) of the Act . However, the direct expenses identified by the assessee in the sum of Rs.36,54,208/- as explained attributable to the earning of ex…

Idfc First Bank Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Range Corporate Circle-2(2), Chennai

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

ITA 221/CHNY/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S.R. Raghunatha

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, C.A ""For Respondent: Shri R.Clement Ramesh Kumar, CIT
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…pellant has also taken an alternative plea that only those investments which have yielded exempt income should be considered for working out the disallowance under Rule 8D. 5.3 The appellant has relied on the case of ACIT Vs Vireet Investment Pvt Ltd (2017) (165 ITD 27) (ITAT Delhi) (Special Bench) in support of the position that the disallowance made under section 14A cannot be added back to the book profits for the purposes of MAT. The appellant has also relied on the cases of JCIT (OSD), LTU Vs TI Financial Holdings Ltd. (ITA No. 1974/Chny/2019) and ACIT Vs Samalpatti Power Company Ltd (ITA Nos 1592 & 1593/Ch…

360 One Wam Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee filed for AY

ITA 578/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…bleDelhi High Courtin the case of Cargo Motors Pvt. Ltd., (ITA No. 7/2020; dt. 07-10-2022) and also the decision rendered by the Special Bench of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd., [2017] 82 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi, ITAT) / 165 ITD 27. 4.2. We find merit in the above said submissions of the assessee. Since the own funds available with the assessee exceeds the value of investments, no disallowance out of interest expenses u/r 8D(2)(ii) is called for. In respect of expenditure disallowance to be made u/r 8D(2)(iii) of I T Rules, we direct the AO to consider only those investments…

360 One Wam Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee filed for AY

ITA 577/MUM/2024[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…bleDelhi High Courtin the case of Cargo Motors Pvt. Ltd., (ITA No. 7/2020; dt. 07-10-2022) and also the decision rendered by the Special Bench of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd., [2017] 82 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi, ITAT) / 165 ITD 27. 4.2. We find merit in the above said submissions of the assessee. Since the own funds available with the assessee exceeds the value of investments, no disallowance out of interest expenses u/r 8D(2)(ii) is called for. In respect of expenditure disallowance to be made u/r 8D(2)(iii) of I T Rules, we direct the AO to consider only those investments…

360 One Wam Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-4(2)(1) Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee filed for AY

ITA 576/MUM/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…bleDelhi High Courtin the case of Cargo Motors Pvt. Ltd., (ITA No. 7/2020; dt. 07-10-2022) and also the decision rendered by the Special Bench of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd., [2017] 82 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi, ITAT) / 165 ITD 27. 4.2. We find merit in the above said submissions of the assessee. Since the own funds available with the assessee exceeds the value of investments, no disallowance out of interest expenses u/r 8D(2)(ii) is called for. In respect of expenditure disallowance to be made u/r 8D(2)(iii) of I T Rules, we direct the AO to consider only those investments…

360 One Wam Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle-12(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee filed for AY

ITA 574/MUM/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Anikesh Banerjee

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh Chaugule &For Respondent: Ms. Madhu Malati Ghosh, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…bleDelhi High Courtin the case of Cargo Motors Pvt. Ltd., (ITA No. 7/2020; dt. 07-10-2022) and also the decision rendered by the Special Bench of the Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd., [2017] 82 taxmann.com 415 (Delhi, ITAT) / 165 ITD 27. 4.2. We find merit in the above said submissions of the assessee. Since the own funds available with the assessee exceeds the value of investments, no disallowance out of interest expenses u/r 8D(2)(ii) is called for. In respect of expenditure disallowance to be made u/r 8D(2)(iii) of I T Rules, we direct the AO to consider only those investments…

Smt. Bridget Anthony(Legal Heir of Late Mr. Elevathingal Joseph Anthony), Bangalore vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 509/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri Sandeep Chalapathy, A.RFor Respondent: Shri V. Parithivel, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 250Section 69

…1 CTR 241 (SC) wherein it was held that opportunity of cross examination not given leads to nullity and assessment order to be quashed. It is also pertinent to mention herein the decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in ACIT v. Vireet Investments (P) Ltd. 165 ITD 27 (Delhi – Trib.) (SB) wherein it was held that when two reasonable constructions of a taxing provision are possible, that construction which favours the assessee must be adopted, which is in line with the Supreme Court judgment in the case of CIT v. Vegetable Products, 88 ITR 192 (SC). This is a well accepted construction recognized by various cour…

M/S Hem Sil Trading and Mnufacturing Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir-12(2)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 4633/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S. Hem Sil Trading & Asst. Cit, Circle 12(2)(2) Manufacturing Private Limited Mumbai Plot No. 645/646, Oberoi Chambers Ii, Vs. New Link Road, Andheri, Mumbai-400 053 Pan/Gir No. Aaach 1716 P (Assessee) (Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal a/wFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…14A is required to be made when there is no exempt income. The ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. ITO 124 TTJ 577 and the Delhi Special Bench decision in the case of Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. [2018] 165 ITD 27. 9. On the above factual matrix of the case, it is observed that the lower authorities have not denied the fact that the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration but has held that the criteria whether the assessee has earned any exempt income or not, is irrelevant for disallowing the expenditure claimed by the…

Income Tax Officer-12(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Elder Prroject Limited, Mumbai

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

ITA 677/MUM/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Smt Renu Jauhriito(It)-12(2)(1), Vs. Elder Project Ltd 301-302, Kunthu Room No. 145, 1St Floor, Commercial Centre, Aayakar Bhawan, 3Rd Floor, Plot No. 174, Churchgate, Near Ayyappa Temple, Mumbai – 400020. Bangur N, Goregaon (W), Mumbai-400090. Pan/Gir No. Aaace7387B (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 43B

…puting the book profits u/s 115JB of the Act. Whereas the Ld.AR contentions are that the CIT(A) has dealt on the facts, 22 Elder Project Ltd, Mumbai provisions of the Act and special bench decision in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Private Limited [165 ITD 27] and deleted the disallowance observing at Page 22 Para 33 & 34 of the CIT(A) order as under: “33. I have considered the submission of the assessee. I find the above issue is academic in nature since the disallowance u/s 14A has been deleted by me in ground no. 2 above. In any case, I find that the above issue is also covered in the favour of the…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ulfex Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2811/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 37Section 43B

…to have been restricted, if at all, to those investments which have actually yielded dividend income during the period. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. 165 ITD 27 (Delhi S.B) and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Limited vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108. In this view of the matter the stand of the assessee is upheld and that of Revenue is declined. 18. Apart from the aforesaid, one more issue involved in ITA No. 1729/Del/2017 (AY 2006-07) is pertaining to addition of Rs. 1,58,320/- m…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ulfex Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2810/DEL/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 37Section 43B

…to have been restricted, if at all, to those investments which have actually yielded dividend income during the period. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. 165 ITD 27 (Delhi S.B) and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Limited vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108. In this view of the matter the stand of the assessee is upheld and that of Revenue is declined. 18. Apart from the aforesaid, one more issue involved in ITA No. 1729/Del/2017 (AY 2006-07) is pertaining to addition of Rs. 1,58,320/- m…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ulfex Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2809/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 37Section 43B

…to have been restricted, if at all, to those investments which have actually yielded dividend income during the period. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. 165 ITD 27 (Delhi S.B) and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Limited vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108. In this view of the matter the stand of the assessee is upheld and that of Revenue is declined. 18. Apart from the aforesaid, one more issue involved in ITA No. 1729/Del/2017 (AY 2006-07) is pertaining to addition of Rs. 1,58,320/- m…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ulfex Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 2808/DEL/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Vimal Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sarita Kumari, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 37Section 43B

…to have been restricted, if at all, to those investments which have actually yielded dividend income during the period. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. 165 ITD 27 (Delhi S.B) and the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ACB India Limited vs. ACIT 374 ITR 108. In this view of the matter the stand of the assessee is upheld and that of Revenue is declined. 18. Apart from the aforesaid, one more issue involved in ITA No. 1729/Del/2017 (AY 2006-07) is pertaining to addition of Rs. 1,58,320/- m…