ACIT v. Wockhardt Ltd.

62 Taxmann.com 60Reported decision2015#11924 most cited
9

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2022.

Judgments citing ACIT v. Wockhardt Ltd.

M/S. Matheson Bosanquet Enterprises Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1908/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillaiita. No. 1908/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Matheson Bosanquet The Assistant Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of Income No. 26/1, Sua House, Tax, Kasturba Cross Road, Circle 4 (1) (2), Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bengaluru. Pan: Aabcm9747J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee: Smt. Jinita Chaterjee, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 30.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2021 Order Per Beena Pillai, Jm. Present Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 11/07/2019 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-4, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2016-17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: Tax Effect Relating To Each Ground Of Grounds Of Appeal Appeal (See Note Below) The Assessing Officer Erred In Computing The Disallowance Of Rs.9,68,872/- Uls 14A Of The Income Tax Act Read With Rule 8D(2)(I) 1. Rs. 2,99,381/- ,8D(2)(Ii) & 8D2(Iii) The Assessing Officer While Apportioning The Interest Expenditure Ought To Have Observed That The Investments

For Appellant: Smt. Jinita Chaterjee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl
Section 143(2)Section 14A

…in computation of disallowance u/s. 14A r.w. Rule 8D(2)(ii) and 8D(2)(iii) of the Act. The contention of the ld. AR is that the interest cost has to be considered as Rs.2,00,54,050. He relied on the following judgments :- (i) DCIT vs. Microlabs bracket (2015) 62 Taxmann.com 60 (ii) ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments (2017) 82 Taxmann.com 415 (Del.-SB) 6.2. On the contrary the Ld.Sr.DR relied on orders passed by authorities below. 6.3. We have perused submissions advanced by both sides in light of records placed before us. 6.4. It is submitted by the Ld.AR that assessee had sufficient funds in the form of share capital a…

ACIT v. Wockhardt Ltd. (62 Taxmann.com 60) — Cited in 9 Judgments | BharatTax