How many judgments cite CCI Ltd. v. JCIT?

128 judgments on BharatTax cite CCI Ltd. v. JCIT (250 CTR 291), spanning 2008 to 2025.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CCI Ltd. v. JCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 10(34), Section 143(3), Section 14A, Section 250.

CCI Ltd. v. JCIT

250 CTR 291High Court2012#808 most cited

What is CCI Ltd. v. JCIT authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A for exempt income is not warranted for notional expenditure where no actual expenditure is incurred. This principle extends to shares held as stock-in-trade if the primary purpose is not to earn dividend income.

128

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2008 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CCI Ltd. v. JCIT · Section 14A disallowance · exempt income expenditure · notional expenditure · shares stock-in-trade · dividend income · Rule 8D · actual expenditure · Section 10(34) · Karnataka High Court

Also reported as

206 Taxmann 56320 Taxmann.com 196250 ITR 29171 DTR 141

Sections most often in play

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A Section 250

Issues it is cited on

section 8d strategic investment interest free advances disallowance under section 14a disallowance u/s 14a section 36(1)(iii)commercial expediency book profits section 14a section 36(1)section 10 section 36

Judgments citing CCI Ltd. v. JCIT

Gandhi Securities & Investments P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3781/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Dec 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Pawan Singh, Jm M/S. Gandhi Securities & Vs. Dcit, Tax-4(1)Mumbai – Investments Pvt. Ltd., 400 020 9, Haji Kasam Building, 2Nd Floor, Tamarind Lane, Fort, Mumbai – 400 001 Pan/Gir No. Aaacg2133P Appellant) .. Respondent) Assessee By Shri Rahul Kapadia Revenue By Shri Premanand J

Section 14A

…11 vide order dated 14.09.2012 while relying upon the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of "CIT vs. Smt. Leena Ramachandran (339 ITR 296) and further on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of "CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT" 250 CTR 291 has held that disallowance under section 14A in relation to dividend received from trading shares cannot be made. The said finding of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of "CIT vs. India Advantage Securities Ltd." in ITA No.1131 of 2013 vide order dated 17.03.2015 (supra). The said decision ho…

Anvil Fintrade P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 6788/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Ram Lal Negim/S.Anvil Fintrade Pvt. Ltd. 201, 2Nd Floor, Krishna Kunj, Mehta Road, Opp. Sun Flower Hospital, Jvpd Scheme, Vile Parle (W), Mumbai -56. Pan: Aabca 9882 E ...... Appellant Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax 2(1), Aaykar Bhavan, Churchgate, Mumbai 40020 .... Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Neelam C. JhadhavFor Respondent: Shri Arun Shenoy

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of DCIT vs. India Advantage Securities Ltd. dated 14/09/2011 for assessment year 2008-09. In the case of India Advantage Securities Ltd. (supra), the Tribunal, after relying on the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT, 250 CTR 291 (Kar) held that the disallowance under section 14A of the Act could not be made in respect of exempt income received on shares held as stock-in-trade. The Tribunal also considered the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Daga Capital Management (Pvt.) Ltd.,(supra) and since it was contrary to the judgment of the Hon’ble Ka…

DCIT 4(1), Mumbai vs. Brijmohan Sagarmal Capital Services P.Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 6942/MUM/2013[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Oct 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.6942/Mum/2013 (ननधधारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2011-12) The Dy. Commissioner Of बनधम/ M/S Brijmohan Sangarmal Capital Income Tax -4(1), Services Pvt.Ltd., Vs. Room No.640, 6Th Floor, 412, Stock Exchange Tower, Dalal Street, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400023 M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020 स्थधयी ऱेखध सं./ Pan :Aaacb7335E अपीऱार्थी ओर से / Revenue By Shri Sachidanand Dube प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By Shri Pankaj R Toparani सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 30.5.2016 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 27.10.2016 आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, Am This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Challenging The Order Of Ld.Cit(A) - 8, Mumbai Dated 17.9.2013 For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. Only Issue Raised In Ground No.1 Is Against The Partly Allowing The Appeal Of The Assessee Against The Disallowance Of Rs.2,28,56,550/- Under Section 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called The Act) Comprising Interest

Section 10(34)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…No.6711/Mum/2011 (wherein 4 one of us a party to the decision took the view that no disallowance could be made u/s 14A in respect of dividend income received from shares held as trading stock placing reliance on the decisions of CCL Ltd V/s JCIT reported in 250 CTR 291 (Kar) and in the case of Gajan Trading Co.Pct. Ltd ITA No.3724/Mum/2005. In this case, the coordinate Bench distinguished Special Bench in Daga Capital (supra) by holding that decision of Daga Capital was not applicable in the case of dividend received from trading shares (SIT). In the light of the above decision, we are inclined to allow grounds…

S vs. Securities P. Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 7442/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील सं /I.Ta No. 7442/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Svs Securities Pvt. The Acit, Range-4(2), बनाम/ Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. 32-B, Khatau Bldg., Mumbai-400 020 Alkesh Dinesh Modi Marg, Fort, Mumbai-400 023 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. Aabcs 5982K .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Shri Virag M. Shah अपीलाथ" ओर से/ Appellant By: ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent By: Shri R.K. Shah

For Respondent: Shri R.K. Shah

Section 14A

…g upon the decision of the Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of "CIT vs. Smt. Leena M/s. Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd. Ramachandran (339 ITR 296) and further on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of "CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT" 250 CTR 291 has held that disallowance under section 14A in relation to dividend received from trading shares cannot be made. The said finding of the Tribunal has been upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in the case of "CIT vs. India Advantage Securities Ltd." in ITA No.1131 of 2013 vide order dated 17.03.2015 (supra). The said decision ho…

P.K. Shah Shares & Securities P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT 4(2) Or CIT City 4, Mumbai

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

ITA 944/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh: (A.Y : 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri N.R. AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri A.K. Kardam

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ted before us has been affirmed by our coordinate Bench in the case of Devkant Synthetics (India) Pvt. Ltd. (supra). In coming to the said decision, the Tribunal referring to the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (2012) 250 CTR 291, as also the judgment of Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT vs. India Advantage Securities Ltd. (ITA No. 1131 of 2013 dated 17.3.2015). In our considered opinion, the Assessing Officer has not furnished any reasons for rejecting the suo motu disallowance of Rs.50,000/- computed by the 5 M/s. Prakash K. Shah Shares & Securities Pvt. Ltd…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Prvainchandra N. Kamdar, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5487/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S. Naik

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 260

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS. 5481 TO 5483 & : (A.Ys : 2006-07 TO 2008-09 & 2012-13) 5487/MUM/2015 DCIT, Central Circle-7(3), Vs. Shri Pravinchandra N. Kamdar Mumbai (Appellant) 316, Loha Bhavan, P.D’Mello Road, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai - 9 PAN : AADPK0725D (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Paresh Shaparia Revenue by : Shri B.C.S. Naik Date of Hearing : 19/07/2016 Date of Pronouncement : 30/09/2016 O R D E R PER G.S. PANNU, AM : These are a bunch of four appeals by the Revenue relating to a…

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Prvainchandra N. Kamdar, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5483/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S. Naik

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 260

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Prvainchandra N. Kamdar, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5482/MUM/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S. Naik

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 260

DCIT Cen Cir 7(3), Mumbai vs. Prvainchandra N. Kamdar, Mumbai

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5481/MUM/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Shri Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Shri B.C.S. Naik

Section 132(1)Section 139Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 153A(1)Section 260

Windia Infrastructure Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 1(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 5417/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Sept 2016AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Vijay MehtaFor Respondent: Capt. Pradeep Arya

Section 14A

…excluded for the purpose of disallowance u/s.14A of the Act. For this purpose reliance was placed on the following judicial pronouncements :- i)CIT vs. India Advantage Securities, ITA No.1131/2013, dated 17.3.2015 (Bombay High Court); ii)CCI Ltd. Vs. Jt.CIT, 250 CTR 291 (Kar) iii)HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT, 383 ITR 529 (Bom) In support of the proposition that no disallowance u/s.14A is warranted in respect of investment in the subsidiary/group companies, reliance was placed on the following decisions :- i)Cheminvest Ltd. v CIT [378 ITR 33 (Del)/ 281 CTR 447 (Del)] ii) Garware Wall Ropes Limited v Addl. CIT (ITA No.…

Jm Financial Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 4(3), Mumbai

ITA 441/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri Ashwani Taneja ()

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…A r.w. Rule 8D can be made on shares held as stock-in-trade. The Pune Bench of the Tribunal has been consistently following this view by placing reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. Vs. JCIT reported as 71 DTR 141 (Kar.). The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of HDFC Bank Ltd. Vs. DCIT (supra) has reversed the order of Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal.” It was clearly stated by the Ld.Counsel that the facts may be verified by the AO in this regard and amount of disallowance could be reworked accordingly. The Ld.DR also had no objection for the same. Therefo…

Pankaj D. Shah, Mumbai vs. ACIT 21(1), Mumbai

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 4494/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri Ashwani Taneja () I.T.A. No.4494/Mum/2014 (Assessment Year : 2010-11) Shri Pankaj D Shah Vs Acit 21(1), Mumbai 60-B, Dolat, East West Road No.2 Jvpd, Vile Parle (W), Mumbi-49 Pan : Aaafps1913H (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…estee companies and, therefore, in view of following judgments, the same investments should be excluded for making disallowance u/s 14A: 1. CIT vs India Advantage Securities Ltd – Appeal No.1131 of 2013 (Bom) – 3 I.T.A. No.4494/Mum/2014 2. CCI Ltd vs JCIT – 20 Taxmann.com 196 (Kar) 3. Garware Wall Ropes Ltd vs Addl CIT – 46 taxmann.com 18 (Mum) 4. Rajendra D Shah – ITA No.4492/Mum/2014 The Ld.Counsel also submitted that although arguments were made before the lower authorities in this regard, but, since the law in this regard was not properly evolved and since now various courts have clarified the correct posit…

M/S Manipal Education and Medical Group India Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, all the three appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 1258/BANG/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore21 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Shri Vijay Pal Rao

For Appellant: Smt Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Vandana Sagar, CIT

Section 14A

…nipal Media Network Limited Vs. DCIT, Circle -1, Udupi in ITA No.1266IBangI2012, order dated 25.10.2013, assessment year 2009-2010. e) The learned CIT(A)-II, Bangalore has overlooked the following decisions relied on by the Appellant. i) CCI Limited vs. JCIT [250 ITR 291} (Kar). ii) ACIT Vs. Jindal Aluminium Ltd. (ITA No. 799/Bang/2012, dated 30.4.2013). iii) DCIT Vs. Ashish Jhunjhunwala (ITA No. 1899/Kol/2012, dated 14.5.2013). f) The learned CIT(A)-ll, Bangalore has erred in relying on the decision of the Income tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore Bench in the case of GMR Power Corporation Ltd. Vs. Dy. CIT (2014)…

Shriram Retail Holdings Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 885/CHNY/2015[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai10 Aug 2016AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Parmindu, CIT

Section 115JSection 142(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ’डी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार",लेखा सद"य एवं "ीजी. पवन कुमार,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.885/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2010-2011 Shriram Retail Holdings Private Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Limited, Income Tax, (Since Amalgamated with Company Circle VI(2) Shriram City Union Finance Ltd) Chennai 600 034. No.4, Mookambika Complex, Lady Desika Road, Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. [PAN AAJCS 7325N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Dena Bank, Mumbai

In the result appeal ITA No

ITA 6644/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Sh. Br Baskaran & Sh Pawan Singh

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 263

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI- BENCH “D” BEFORE SH. BR BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 6644/M/2013 for Assessment Year 2006 – 07 ITA N0. 6645/M/2013 for Assessment Year 2006 – 07 ACIT-(2) (3) Room No. 552 M/s. Dena Bank 5th floor, Aayakar Bhavan Versus Dena Bank Building, 2nd floor, 17 -B Horiman MK Road, Mumbai-400020 Circle, Fort, Mumbai. 4 00023 PAN- AAACD 4249B Appellant Respondent Appellant represented by Shri A.K.Srivastava CIT DR Respondent represented by Mr S. Ananthan AR ITA N0. 3505/M/2013 for Assessment Year 2009 – 10 ACIT-(2) (3) Room No. 552 M/s. Dena…

Dena Bank, Mumbai vs. Asst (OSD) 2(3), Mumbai

In the result appeal ITA No

ITA 3696/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. Br Baskaran & Sh Pawan Singh

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 154Section 263

Subhakam Ventures (I) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2954/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./2954/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Shubkam Ventures(I) Pvt. Ltd. Acit, Circle-2(3) The Internatinal House Aayakar Bhavan 4Th Floor, 16, Mk Road Vs. Mumbai. Churchgate,Mumbai-400 020. Pan:Aaacw 1624 M आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./3376/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Acit, Circle-2(3) Shubkam Ventures(I) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Mumbai. Mumbai 400 020. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri R.K. Sahu Assessee By: Shri Sanjay Parikh सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 28.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 28.07.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) "" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार राजे"" "" "" लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे राजे Challenging The Order,Dated 14/02/2013 Of The Cit (A)-6,Mumbai, The Assessing Officer(Ao)And The Assessee Have Filed The Cross-Appeals For The Year Under Consi - Deration.Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Investments & Trading In Shares & Securities,Filed Its Return Of Income On 29/09/2009,Declaring Total Loss Of Rs.16.12 Lakhs.The Ao Completed The Assessment, U/S.143 (3)Of The Act,On 27/12/ 2011,Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.1,20,45,370/-.

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay ParikhFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Sahu

Section 14Section 143Section 14ASection 250(6)Section 254(1)

…he Rules. 3.Aggrieved by the order of the AO,the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority(FAA).Before him,it was argued that stock in trade should be excluded from average value of investment.The FAA referred to the cases of CCL Ltd.(250 CTR 291),Yatish Trading Company Private Ltd.(129 ITD 237) and held that stock in trade should not be considered as investment for the purpose of average value of the investment for computing disallowance under Rule 8D of the Rules. 4.During the course of hearing before us, the Departmental Representative(DR) left the issue to the discretion of the bench…

Starwar Comtrade P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

ITA 7291/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: S/Sh.Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर अपील आयकर अपील संसंसंसं./Ita.S./7291-92/Mum/2014,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Ay.S.2010-11 & 2011-12 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" M/S. Starwar Comtrade P. Ltd. Acit, Range- 3(3) 11,12 1St Floor, Palm Spring Aayakar Bhavan, 6Th Floor Hastikar Marg, Prabhadevi Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Mumbai-400 025. Pan:Aafcs 6880 A (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri J. Saravanan -Dr Assessee By: Shri Dharmesh Shah सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 07.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 27.07.2016 आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- अनुसार Challenging The Orders,Dated 30/10/2014 Of The Cit (A)-7,Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Appeals For The Above-Mentioned Assessment Years(Ay.S.).Issue Involved In All The Appeals Is About Disallowance Made U/S.14A Of The Act.So,We Are Adjudicating Both The Appeals By Single Order. The Details Of Dates Of Filing Of Returns,Returned Incomes & Assessed Income Etc. Can Be Summarised As Under In The Tabular Form: A.Y. Roi Filed Assessed Returned Income(Rs.) Assessment Dt. On Income(Rs.) 2010-11 20.09.2010 (-)Rs.2.28 Crores 28.12.2012 (-)7,04,116/- 2011-12 16.09.2011 Nil - 2,61,14,570/-

For Appellant: Shri Dharmesh ShahFor Respondent: Shri J. Saravanan -DR

Section 14Section 14ASection 254(1)

…iness expenditure, that it was a Trader in shares and securities, that the dividend income arising to it was incidental to business being in the nature of exempt income. The assessee relied upon the case of Yatish Trading Company Private Ltd.(supra), CCI Ltd.(250 CTR 291) and Leena Ramachandran(339ITR 296). It was further argued that the stock in trade held by the assessee could never be equated with the investment, that 7291/M/14starwar stock in trade was a business asset, that the investments would be for earning long-term benefit including appreciation of assets, that no disallowance under section 14 A could…

Logus Realty P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the A

ITA 8529/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri. Paresh ShapariaFor Respondent: Shri. Inder Solanki

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80G

…ed order. 6. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record including the decision relied upon by the assessee. The coordinate Bench of the Tribunal following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in CCL Ltd. vs. JCIT( 250 CTR 291), has decided the identical issue in the case of M/s Advantage Securities Ltd(supra) holding as under:- “6. However, the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka has recently considered the disallowance of expenses incurred on borrowings made for purchase of trading shares u/s.14A of the I.T. Act in case of CCL Ltd. vs. JCIT (supra). The assessee in that…

D.C.I.T Cir - 6, Kolkata. vs. M/S Uco Bank, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed and that of Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed

ITA 911/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 212Section 36(1)(viia)Section 43B

…td 31 taxmann.com 113 (Kol); DCIT vs. Kredent Brokerage Services Ltd. in ITA No. 806/Kol/2012 and in the case of DCIT vs. Baljit Securities Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.1183/Kol/2012 and also the judgment of Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCI Ltd. vs. CIT 250 CTR 291 (Kar); ITA No.585 & 911/Kol/2013 A.Y 2009-10 UCO Bank v. DCIT Cir-6, Kol. Page 7 In the instant case since the assessee is a dealer in share, therefore the rigorous provision u/s 14A r.w.s 8D of the IT Rule shall not be applied with respect to share held by way of stock-in-trade. In this connection, whether assessee is a dealer in share or not w…