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

35 judgments on BharatTax cite ACIT v. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. (58 ITR 313), spanning 2018 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 115JB, Section 14A, Section 41(1), Section 80IA, Section 142(1), Section 143(1).

ACIT v. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd.

58 ITR 313High Court2017#3470 most cited

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

Disallowance under Section 14A cannot be added to book profits computed under Section 115JB. This is because the calculation of book profits under Section 115JB should not include notional expenses.

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2018 to 2026.

Also referred to as

ACIT vs Vireet Investment Pvt Ltd · section 14A · section 115JB · disallowance · book profit · dividend income · Rule 8D

Also reported as

165 ITD 25

Sections most often in play

Section 115JB Section 14A Section 41(1)Section 80IA Section 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 250(6)

Issues it is cited on

section 41(1)section 80ia section 41 section 115j section 80i disallowance u/s 14a disallowance under section 14a section 115jb section 14a dispute resolution panel section 254 international transaction

Judgments citing ACIT v. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd.

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 5(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. JSW STEEL COATED PRODUCTS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the

ITA 5143/MUM/2024[2016]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 254Section 80Section 801ASection 80A(6)

…1 relates to adding the disallowance of section 14A to book profit under section 115JB. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that these grounds of appeal are also covered by the decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in ACIT vs Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. 58 ITR 313. 13. On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue supported the order oflower authorities. 14. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and haves gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that during the year under consideration, the assessee has shown / earned dividend income of Rs. 87,53,540/-. The…

DCIT-5(2)(1),MUMBAI, AAYAKAR BHAVAN vs. JSW STEEL COATED PRODUCTS LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the

ITA 5142/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2026AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh & Shri Girish Agrawal

Section 254Section 80Section 801ASection 80A(6)

…11 relates to adding the disallowance of section 14A to book profit under section 115JB. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that these grounds of appeal are also covered by the decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in ACIT vs Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. 58 ITR 313. - 13.On the other hand, ld. CIT-DR for the Revenue supported the order oflower authorities. - 14. We have considered the rival submissions of both the parties and haves gone through the orders of lower authorities carefully. We find that during the year under consideration, the assessee has shown / earned dividend income of Rs. 87,53,540/-. The a…

ARKIS ENTERPRISES PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 5(2)(3), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 5113/MUM/2024[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: SMT BEENA PILLAI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: RespondentFor Respondent: Ms. Pradnya Gholap (Sr. DR)

Section 115JSection 14Section 142Section 143Section 14ASection 250Section 250(6)Section 41(1)

…ing notional expenditure as computed under section 14A and increasing the book profit by that sum under Section 115JB. This issue is also covered by Hon’ble Special Bench of this Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd., reported in (2017) 58 ITR 313. 6.4. In respect of the disallowance made under section 41 (1) of the act, the Ld.AR submitted that, the creditors remain outstanding in the books of the assessee during the year under consideration. He submitted that the assessee neither paid the said amount nor received any benefit by way of cesation remission of the liabilities. Referring to pa…

M/S. BHARAT ELECTRONICS LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LTU, CIRCLE-1, BENGALURU

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

ITA 394/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Vice- & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2012-13 M/S. Bharat Electronics The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner Of Registered Office, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road Ltu, Nagawara, Circle – 1, Vs. Bangalore – 560 045. Bangalore. Pan: Aaacb5985C Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Smt. Richa .B, CAFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR

Section 14ASection 43A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/s. Bharat Electronics The Assistant Ltd., Commissioner of Registered Office, Income Tax, Outer Ring Road LTU, Nagawara, Circle – 1, Vs. Bangalore – 560 045. Bangalore. PAN: AAACB5985C APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Richa .B, CA Revenue by : Shri Manoj Kumar, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 20-09-2023 Date of Pronouncement : 29-09-2023 ORDER PER LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the or…

SAMCO SECURITIES LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. CIT (A) NFAC, DELHI

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

ITA 1328/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Amarjit Singhsamco Securities Ltd. Vs. National Faceless Appeal A/1004, Naman Midtown, Centre (Nfac) Senapati Bapat Road, Prabhadevi Mumbai – 400013 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaics2455A Appellant .. Respondent [ Appellant By : None Respondent By : Ram Krishna Kedia Date Of Hearing 06.07.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 18.07.2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Am): This Appeal Filed By The Assesse Is Directed Against The Order Passed By The Nfac, Delhi, Dated 20.02.2023 For A.Y. 2016-17. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Before Us: “1. On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming Disallowance U/S. 14A Of Rs. 1,51,214/- Made By The Ld Ao, Without Appreciating Facts, Submissions & Evidences In Proper Perspective & Without Assigning Any Proper Reasons 2. On Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Passing Order Which Is Bad In Law & Violating The Principle Of Natural Justice As Ld Cit(A) Passed Order Without Giving Opportunity Of Virtual Online Hearing & Also Without Disposing Ground No. 3 Of Appeal Regarding "Assessment Order Contrary To The Principle Of Natural Justice".

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ram Krishna Kedia

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…onouncements. “Ameya Logistics Pvt. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT (2020) 83 ITR 46(SN) (Mum.)(Trib.) ACB India Ltd. Vs. ACIT, [2015] 62 taxmann.com 71 (Delhi) PTC India Ltd. v. DCIT (2019) 69 ITR 37(SN.) (Delhi) (Trib.) ACIT v. Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 165 ITD 27/58 ITR 313/154 DTR 241/188 TTJ 1 (SB) (Delhi)(Trib.) Dy. CIT v. Diamond Co. Ltd. (2017) 162 ITD 131 (Kol.) (Trib.) Yashoda Health Care Services P. Ltd. v. DCIT (2017) 54 ITR 26 (Hyd.) (Trib.)” 6. We consider that the AO has not decided the alternative claim of the assessee. To compute the exempt income after taking into consideration the investment on which…

THOMAS COOK (INDIA) LTD,MUMBAI vs. DY CIT 1 (3)92), MUMBAI

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

ITA 7807/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2015-16 Thomas Cook (India) Ltd., Dy. Cit-1(3)(2), A Wing, 11Th Floor, Marathon Room No. 540, 5Th Floor, Vs. Futurex, N.M. Joshi Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Lower Parel (East), Road, Mumbai-400013. Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aaact 4050 C Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Mr. Ketan Ved Revenue By : Ms. Richa Gulati, Dr : Date Of Hearing 30/05/2023 : Date Of Pronouncement 31/05/2023 Order

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan VedFor Respondent: Ms. Richa Gulati, DR

Section 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 37(1)

…l of the assessee submitted that no addition could be made no addition could be made in view of the decision of in view of the decision of the Special Bench in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investment Investment Pvt. the Special Bench in the case of Ltd. in (17) 58 ITR 313, Delhi Tribunal Special R 313, Delhi Tribunal Special Bench Bench, wherein it is held that disallowance u/s 14A cannot be added while computing is held that disallowance u/s 14A cannot be added while computing is held that disallowance u/s 14A cannot be added while computing Thomas Cook (India) Ltd. Thomas Cook (India) Ltd. 14 ITA No. No. 7807/M/…

DCIT, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. M/S. DEEP FINANCIAL CONSULTANT PRIVATE LIMITED , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2574/MUM/2022[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 148Section 14A

…ate Authority after considering the submissions made by the assessee, has deleted the said addition on the ground that, this issue stands covered in favour of the assessee by the Special Bench of ITAT in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd (2017) 58 ITR 313, wherein the Tribunal has held that no disallowance u/s.14A can be made while computing book profit u/s.115JB. Apart from that, he has also referred to ITAT Mumbai Bench in the case of Reliance Industrial Infrastructure Ltd vs. Addl. CIT in ITA No.69 & 70/Mum/2009. 4. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the impugned order, we find tha…

LAFFANS PETROCHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIRCLE-10(2) (1) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 300/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.298 से 300/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15,2015-16 एवं 2017-18)

For Appellant: S/Shri Haridas Bhat & Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha

Section 43Section 43(5)

…e Act. The CIT(A) has deleted the disallowance by placing reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Bengal Finance & Investments Pvt. Ltd. (supra) and also on the decision in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. 58 ITR 313(Del-SB). It is now a settled proposition that disallowance u/s.14A of the Act could not be added to book profits u/s. 115JB of the Act. No contrary material has been placed before us by the Revenue. We find no infirmity in the findings of the CIT(A) on this issue, hence, ground No.3 of appeal is dismissed. 17. In the result, appeal by the Revenue…

LAFFANS PETROCHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 10(2) (2) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 299/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.298 से 300/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15,2015-16 एवं 2017-18)

For Appellant: S/Shri Haridas Bhat & Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha

Section 43Section 43(5)

LAFFANS PETROCHEMICALS LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR -10(2) (1) , MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 298/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.298 से 300/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15,2015-16 एवं 2017-18)

For Appellant: S/Shri Haridas Bhat & Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha

Section 43Section 43(5)

ACIT 2 (2)(1), MUMBAI vs. LAFFANS PETROCHEMICALS LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2552/MUM/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Mar 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy& Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanआअसं.298 से 300/मुं/2022 ("न.व. 2014-15,2015-16 एवं 2017-18)

For Appellant: S/Shri Haridas Bhat & Shekhar GuptaFor Respondent: Shri Manoj Kumar Sinha

Section 43Section 43(5)

ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI vs. IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is 52

ITA 6488/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Somil AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt Abha Rani Singh

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…by allowing the appeal of the assessee on this ground for earlier year had followed the aforesaid decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court. He further following the decision of Hon’ble ITAT Special Bench in the case of ACIT vs. Vineet Investment Pvt. Ltd. (2017) 58 ITR 313 (Trib) held that disallowance made u/s. 14A cannot be added for computing book profit. He thus directed accordingly. 18. Aggrieved by the order of Ld. CIT(A), assessee is now in appeal before us. 19. Before us learned AR reiterated the submissions made before AO and CIT(A) and further submitted that identical issue arose in assessee’s own case i…

IRCON INTERNATIONAL LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 4, NEW DELHI

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is 52

ITA 6044/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Feb 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Anubhav Sharma

For Appellant: Shri Somil AggarwalFor Respondent: Smt Abha Rani Singh

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

GRASIM INDUSTRIES LTD (SUCCESSOR TO ADITYA BIRLA NUVO LTD),MUMBAI vs. DY CIT CC 1 (4), MUMBAI

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

ITA 7639/MUM/2019[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Apr 2022AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh TharFor Respondent: Shri K. K. Mishra (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 148Section 14ASection 40

…me is liable to be considered for the purpose of disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(iii). In support of this contention, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has placed reliance upon the decision in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments (P.) Ltd. (2017) 58 ITR 313 (Delhi) and others. However, on the other hand, the Ld. Representative of the Department has refuted the said contention. In the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd. (supra) the Hon’ble Special Bench has held as under: - “We have considered the rival submissions of the parties and gone through the orders of the tax authorities below. As n…

PROMISE SECURITIES P.LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 13(1)(4), MUMBAI

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed

ITA 1051/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 1051/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2012-13) & आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 4852/Mum/2017 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years: 2013-14) Promise Securities Pvt. Ltd. बिधम/ Ito Ward-13(1)(4) 202 Hemlok Apartment 87 Room No.216-B, Aayakar Vs. Kilachand Path, S.V. Road, Bhawan, M.K. Road, Kandivali (West), Mumbai- Mumbai-400020. 400067. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp6634N (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: None Revenue By: Shri Mehul Jain (Sr. Ar) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 20/12/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 25/02/2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh, Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Different Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -21, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Ys. 2012- 13 & 2013-14. Ita. No.1051/Mum/2017 2. The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 23.01.2017 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -21

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Mehul Jain (Sr. AR)

Section 133(6)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 68

…ion with the disallowance of expenses u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D to the tune of Rs.22,53,146/-. In this year, the assessee has earned the dividend income to the tune of Rs.17,622/-. In view of the decision in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments (P.) Ltd. (2017) 58 ITR 313 (Delhi) and others (Special Bench), the expenses to earn the exempt income is liable to be restricted to the exempt income i.e. to the tune of Rs.17,622/-. Accordingly, we uphold the disallowance to the extent of exempt income i.e. 17,622/-. Accordingly, this issue is decided in favour of the assessee. ISSUE Nos. 3 & 4 A.Ys.2012-13 & 2013-14 13.…

J.L.MORISON(INDIA) LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT-11(1), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 138/KOL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Sri Sanjay Garg & Sri Rajesh Kumar)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…squarely covered in favour of the assessee by various decisions of the Coordinate Benches of the Tribunal. Reliance in this respect can be placed on the decision of the Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investment (P) Ltd. (2017) 58 ITR 313 (Del-Trib.)(SB) wherein it has been held that only those investments are to be considered for computing average value of investment which yielded exempt income during the year for the purpose of calculation of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules. Another view has been taken by the Kolkata Bench of the Tribunal in the cas…

NSL RENEWABLE POWER PRIVATE LIMITED ,HYDERABAD vs. ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-16(1), HYDERABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 600/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad04 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year: 2014-15 Nsl Renewable Power Pvt. Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Ltd., Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 16(1), Pan – Aabcn 6009L Hyderabad. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Aliasgar Rampurwala Revenue By: Shri Rajendra Kumar Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 04/01/2022

For Appellant: Shri Aliasgar RampurwalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Kumar

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 56(2)(viia)Section 80I

…exclude the amount of addition of Rs.7,66,40,105/- made u/s.14A, while computing the book profit u/s.115JB. In view of this we allow ground no.11 of the appeal.” 11.1 Before the Delhi Special Bench of ITAT in the case of ACIT v. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd., 165 ITD 25 (Del)(SB). two questions were posed and considered by the Special Bench which are as follows:- "(i) Whether the expenditure incurred to earn exempt income computed u/s 14A could not be added while computing book profit u/s 115JB of the Act? And (ii) Whether investments which did not yield any exempt income should enter into the computation under…

M N DASTUR & CO.PVT LTD ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is allowed

ITA 1409/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 Nov 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B. R. Baskaranassessment Year : 2014-15 M/S. M. N. Dastur & Co. Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dcit, 7Th Floor, Raheja Towers, 26/27, Circle-4(1)(2), M. G. Road, Bengaluru – 560 001. Bengaluru. Pan : Aabcm 2136 M Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri. B. K. Manjunath, Advocate Respondent By : Shri. Swaroop Mannava, Jcit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru

For Appellant: Shri. B. K. Manjunath, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Swaroop Mannava, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 40A(2)(b)

…ero Cycles Pvt. Ltd., 228 ITR 463 (SC). With regard to disallowance under section 14A of the Act in the context of section 115JB of the Act, the assessee relied on the decision of the Special Bench of ITAT in the case of ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd., 165 ITD 25 (Delhi – Special Bench) wherein it was held that disallowance computed under section 14A of the Act cannot be added while computing book profits under section 115JB of the Act. Assessee also pointed out that without looking into the computation of the disallowance of Rs.3,00,000/- under section 14A of the Act, the AO cannot seek to rectify the dis…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD- 4(1)(2), BANGALORE vs. M/S. KHODAY INDIA LIMITED, BANGALORE

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

ITA 2085/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K & Shri B.R. Baskaranincome Tax Officer, Ward 4(1)(2), Bangalore. ….Appellant Vs. M/S. Khoday India Limited, 7Th Mile, Brewery House, Bangalore-560 062 ……Respondent. Pan Aaack 6734C Assessee By: Shri S.Sundar Rajan, Addl. Cit (D.R) Revenue By: Shri V. Sridhar, C.A.

For Appellant: Shri S.Sundar Rajan, Addl. CIT (D.R)For Respondent: Shri V. Sridhar, C.A

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 154

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “ A ” BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Income Tax Officer, Ward 4(1)(2), Bangalore. ….Appellant Vs. M/s. Khoday India Limited, 7th Mile, Brewery House, Bangalore-560 062 ……Respondent. PAN AAACK 6734C Assessee By: Shri S.Sundar Rajan, Addl. CIT (D.R) Revenue By: Shri V. Sridhar, C.A. Date of Hearing : 07.09.2020. Date of Pronouncement : 08.09.2020. O R D E R PER SHRI GEORGE GEORGE K, JM : This appeal at the instance of Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax…

M/S. PAI & PAI ENTERPRISES,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE- 2(2)(1), BANGALORE

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

ITA 2302/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year:

For Appellant: Shri Pranav Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru

Section 14A

…d tax- free exempt income should be considered and not the entire value of investments. In support of this stand, reliance was placed on the decision of the Delhi Special Bench of the ITAT in the case of ACIT v Vireet Investments Pvt Ltd., 58 ITR (Trib) 313 / 165 ITD 25 (SB)(Del). 9. We have considered the submissions made on behalf of the assessee and the ld. DR. In the case of Vireet Investments Pvt Ltd. Page 4 of 4 (supra), one of the questions that arose for consideration was, whether for applying Rule 8D only dividend yielding investments should be taken into consideration for computing the average value o…

Showing 1–20 of 35 · Page 1 of 2