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 14ASection 250

Issues it is cited on

section 8dstrategic investmentinterest free advancesdisallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 36(1)(iii)commercial expediencybook profitssection 14asection 36(1)section 10section 36

Judgments citing CCI Ltd. v. JCIT

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

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

ITA 585/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…

Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 955/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri V.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, D.R
Section 14ASection 73

…rala High Court in the case of “CIT vs. Smt. Leena ITA Nos.1349/M/2012 & 955/M/2014 17 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…

Fiduciary Euromax Global Markets Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(1), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1349/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Sanjay Garg

For Appellant: Shri V.C. Shah, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. Senthil Kumaran, D.R
Section 14ASection 73

…rala High Court in the case of “CIT vs. Smt. Leena ITA Nos.1349/M/2012 & 955/M/2014 17 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…

D.C.I.T Cir - 1, Kolkata vs. M/S Teenlok Advisory Services Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed

ITA 1351/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri N.V. Vasudevan

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…I.T.A. No. 1351/KOL./2013 Assessment year: 2009-2010 Page 1 of 17 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘A’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Accountant Member and Shri N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member I.T.A. No. 1351/KOL/ 2013 Assessment Year: 2009-2010 Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax,................................Appellant Circle-1, Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700 069 -Vs.- M/s. Teenlok Advisory Services Pvt. Limited,..................Respondent 102, Windsor, Vidyanagri Road, Santacruz (East), Mumbai-400 098 [PAN: AACCT 3123 E] Appearances by: Shri S.S. Alam,…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and Revenue are 22

ITA 1647/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1388/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Vijayalakshmi, IRS, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50B

…ved by the assessee. That activity itself called for considerable management attention and could not be left to a junior clerk’’. This view has been further supported by the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Smt. Leena Ramachandran (2011) (339 ITR 293) (Kerala HC). 6.2.4 In view of the above discussion, the Assessing Officer is right in invoking the provisions of s.14A and working of disallowance as per Rule 80. However, as part of the investment made is in the subsidiaries, the Assessing Officer Is directed to eliminate the investment made in such subsidiaries while working out average inves…

Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee and Revenue are 22

ITA 1388/CHNY/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai07 Jun 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1388/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri. S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Mrs. Vijayalakshmi, IRS, CIT
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 2Section 50B

…ved by the assessee. That activity itself called for considerable management attention and could not be left to a junior clerk’’. This view has been further supported by the decision of Hon'ble Kerala High Court in the case of Smt. Leena Ramachandran (2011) (339 ITR 293) (Kerala HC). 6.2.4 In view of the above discussion, the Assessing Officer is right in invoking the provisions of s.14A and working of disallowance as per Rule 80. However, as part of the investment made is in the subsidiaries, the Assessing Officer Is directed to eliminate the investment made in such subsidiaries while working out average inves…

ACIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Visaria Securities P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal for A

ITA 6900/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainacit, Circle 4(2) M/S. Visaria Securities P. Ltd. Room No. 642, 6Th Floor 301-A, Commerce House Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 140, N.M. Road, Fountain Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400001 Pan - Aaacv7721L Appellant Respondent

For Respondent: Shri Niraj D. Sheth
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 94(7)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Sandeep Gosain, Judicial Member ACIT, Circle 4(2) M/s. Visaria Securities P. Ltd. Room No. 642, 6th Floor 301-A, Commerce House Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road 140, N.M. Road, Fountain Mumbai 400020 Mumbai 400001 PAN - AAACV7721L Appellant Respondent Applicant by: Shri A. Kumbhar Respondent by: Shri Niraj D. Sheth Date of Hearing: 09.05.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 11.05.2016 O R D E R Per Jason P. Boaz, A.M. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-8, Mumbai dated 13.09.20…

M/S Manipal Technologies Limited, Manipal vs. Addl..C.I.T., Udupi

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

ITA 633/BANG/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Apr 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raom/S.Manipal Technologies Ltd., (Formerly Known As Manipal Press Ltd.) Udayavani Building, Manipal-576104. … Appellant Pan: Aabcm9516H Vs.

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, JCIT(DR)
Section 115Section 115JSection 14ASection 15A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s.Manipal Technologies Ltd., (formerly known as Manipal Press Ltd.) Udayavani Building, Manipal-576104. … Appellant PAN: AABCM9516H Vs. Addl. Commissioner of Income-tax Udupi Range, Udupi-576103. … Respondent Appellant by : Smt. Sheetal Borkar, Advocate Respondent by : Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, JCIT(DR) Date of hearing : 21/04/2016 Date of pronouncement : 29/04/2016 O R D E R Per INTURI RAMA RAO, AM : This is an appeal filed by the assessee directed against th…

Aha Holding P.Ltd ( Formerly Known As I Dream Holdings P. Ltd), Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 22, Mumbai

ITA 8395/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: S/Shjoginder Singh & Rajendraआयकर अपील सं./Ita/8395/Mum/2011,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2008-09 िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Aha Holdings Private Ltd. Acit Central Circle-22 (Formerly Known As Idream Holding Pvt. 403, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road Ltd.), 161 Star City, 2Nd Floor, Vs. Mumbai-400 026. Mahim(W),Mumbai-400 016. Pan:Aafcs 6404 E (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri M.Murli Assessee By: Shri Hiro Rai सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 23.03.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 30.03.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर 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) अनुसार Per Rajendra A.M.- लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार लेखा लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 19/10/2011 Of The Cit (A) – 39, Mumbai The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee-Company,Engaged In The Business Of Financing & Investment, Filed Its Return Of Income On 30/09/2008,Declaring A Loss Of Rs. 4.22 Crores. The Assessing Officer (Ao) Completed The Assessment U/S.143 (3) Of The Act,On 24/12/2010, Determining The Income Of The Assessee At Rs.(-) 3.78 Crores.

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri M.Murli
Section 14Section 143Section 14ASection 254(1)

…ot applicable to stock in trade,that the paintings and property appearing in the balance sheet of the assessee were not excluded while making the disallowance.He referred to cases of Garware Wall Ropes Ltd.(65SOT86),JM Financial Ltd.(ITA/4251/M/2012),CCI Ltd.(206 Taxmann 563).The Departmental Representative (DR)supported the order of the FAA. 5.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find that the AO had made the disallowance u/s.14A of the Act r.w.Rule 8D of the Rules,that while making the disallowance he had included the strategic investments as well as stock in trade, that b…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. Addl. C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 693/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…ned counsel for the assessee- bank submitted that when no expenditure is incurred by the assessee in earning exempt, no notional expenditure can be attributed. In support of this legal proposition, he relied upon the following case-laws: a) CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291)(Kar.) b) Assessee’s own case (381 & 382/2010)(ITA 1397/2006) – (Kar.) c) Corporation Bank (ITA 1310 & 1393/2012) – ITAT, Bang. d) Bank of India (3422 of 2013) ITAT, Mum. e) Bank of Maharashtra (ITA 637/2008) ITAT, Pune Learned counsel for the assessee-bank submitted before us that since interest exempt was earned from securities which was held a…

JCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 684/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…ned counsel for the assessee- bank submitted that when no expenditure is incurred by the assessee in earning exempt, no notional expenditure can be attributed. In support of this legal proposition, he relied upon the following case-laws: a) CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291)(Kar.) b) Assessee’s own case (381 & 382/2010)(ITA 1397/2006) – (Kar.) c) Corporation Bank (ITA 1310 & 1393/2012) – ITAT, Bang. d) Bank of India (3422 of 2013) ITAT, Mum. e) Bank of Maharashtra (ITA 637/2008) ITAT, Pune Learned counsel for the assessee-bank submitted before us that since interest exempt was earned from securities which was held a…

Addl.Ci.T., Bangalore vs. M/S Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 813/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…ned counsel for the assessee- bank submitted that when no expenditure is incurred by the assessee in earning exempt, no notional expenditure can be attributed. In support of this legal proposition, he relied upon the following case-laws: a) CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291)(Kar.) b) Assessee’s own case (381 & 382/2010)(ITA 1397/2006) – (Kar.) c) Corporation Bank (ITA 1310 & 1393/2012) – ITAT, Bang. d) Bank of India (3422 of 2013) ITAT, Mum. e) Bank of Maharashtra (ITA 637/2008) ITAT, Pune Learned counsel for the assessee-bank submitted before us that since interest exempt was earned from securities which was held a…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 793/BANG/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…ned counsel for the assessee- bank submitted that when no expenditure is incurred by the assessee in earning exempt, no notional expenditure can be attributed. In support of this legal proposition, he relied upon the following case-laws: a) CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291)(Kar.) b) Assessee’s own case (381 & 382/2010)(ITA 1397/2006) – (Kar.) c) Corporation Bank (ITA 1310 & 1393/2012) – ITAT, Bang. d) Bank of India (3422 of 2013) ITAT, Mum. e) Bank of Maharashtra (ITA 637/2008) ITAT, Pune Learned counsel for the assessee-bank submitted before us that since interest exempt was earned from securities which was held a…

JCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 601/BANG/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…ned counsel for the assessee- bank submitted that when no expenditure is incurred by the assessee in earning exempt, no notional expenditure can be attributed. In support of this legal proposition, he relied upon the following case-laws: a) CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291)(Kar.) b) Assessee’s own case (381 & 382/2010)(ITA 1397/2006) – (Kar.) c) Corporation Bank (ITA 1310 & 1393/2012) – ITAT, Bang. d) Bank of India (3422 of 2013) ITAT, Mum. e) Bank of Maharashtra (ITA 637/2008) ITAT, Pune Learned counsel for the assessee-bank submitted before us that since interest exempt was earned from securities which was held a…

Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. JCIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 530/BANG/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…ned counsel for the assessee- bank submitted that when no expenditure is incurred by the assessee in earning exempt, no notional expenditure can be attributed. In support of this legal proposition, he relied upon the following case-laws: a) CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291)(Kar.) b) Assessee’s own case (381 & 382/2010)(ITA 1397/2006) – (Kar.) c) Corporation Bank (ITA 1310 & 1393/2012) – ITAT, Bang. d) Bank of India (3422 of 2013) ITAT, Mum. e) Bank of Maharashtra (ITA 637/2008) ITAT, Pune Learned counsel for the assessee-bank submitted before us that since interest exempt was earned from securities which was held a…

Addl.CIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 530/BANG/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…ned counsel for the assessee- bank submitted that when no expenditure is incurred by the assessee in earning exempt, no notional expenditure can be attributed. In support of this legal proposition, he relied upon the following case-laws: a) CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291)(Kar.) b) Assessee’s own case (381 & 382/2010)(ITA 1397/2006) – (Kar.) c) Corporation Bank (ITA 1310 & 1393/2012) – ITAT, Bang. d) Bank of India (3422 of 2013) ITAT, Mum. e) Bank of Maharashtra (ITA 637/2008) ITAT, Pune Learned counsel for the assessee-bank submitted before us that since interest exempt was earned from securities which was held a…

M/S. Canara Bank, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Bangalore

In the result, appeal by the revenue is partly allowed

ITA 479/BANG/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri G.Sarangan, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G.R.Reddy, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35DSection 36(1)(viia)

…ned counsel for the assessee- bank submitted that when no expenditure is incurred by the assessee in earning exempt, no notional expenditure can be attributed. In support of this legal proposition, he relied upon the following case-laws: a) CCI Ltd. vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291)(Kar.) b) Assessee’s own case (381 & 382/2010)(ITA 1397/2006) – (Kar.) c) Corporation Bank (ITA 1310 & 1393/2012) – ITAT, Bang. d) Bank of India (3422 of 2013) ITAT, Mum. e) Bank of Maharashtra (ITA 637/2008) ITAT, Pune Learned counsel for the assessee-bank submitted before us that since interest exempt was earned from securities which was held a…

ACIT 21(2), Mumbai vs. Vivek Mehrotra, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA N0

ITA 915/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Mar 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.915/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) Acit – 21(2), Shri Vivek Mehrotra, बनाम/ R. No. 508. 225, Brij Bhushan, V. C-10, 5 Th Floor, Bkc, Sion (East), Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400 022. Mumbai 400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aahpm 4127 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Satya Pal Kumar (D.R.)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “F” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.915/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) ACIT – 21(2), Shri Vivek Mehrotra, बनाम/ R. No. 508. 225, Brij Bhushan, v. C-10, 5 th floor, BKC, Sion (East), Bandra (E), Mumbai- 400 022. Mumbai 400 051. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAHPM 4127 B (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Satya Pal Kumar (D.R.) Assessee by : None सुनवाई क" तार"ख /Date of Hearing : 14-01-2016 घोषणा क" तार"ख /D…

Arj Shares & Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. RG. 4(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1473/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No. 1473/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09)

For Appellant: Shri Manoj Kumar
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 55(2)(ab)

…/2000 in the case of M/s. American Express Bank Limited. The Id. AR for the assessee, on the other hand, submitted that issue was covered in favour of the assessee by the latest judgment of the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCL Ltd. Vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291) in which it has been held that no disallowance could be made u/s.14A in respect of dividend income received from the shares held as trading stock. It was pointed out that following the said judgment, the Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Ganjam Treading Co. P. Ltd. in the order dated 20.07.2012 in ITA No.3724/Mum/2005 have held that th…

Jmp Securities P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 4(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5688/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 Feb 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2010-11 M/S. Jmp Securities Pvt. Ltd., Additional Commissioner Of Elite Square, 27, Income Tax, Range – 4(3), Room No.649, 6Th Floor, Parin Nariman Street, Vs. Bazargate, Near Khaugalli, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Opp. Parsi Agyari, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 Pan: Aaacj 8850C (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri K. Gopal, A.R. Revenue By : Shri K. Mohandas, D.R. Date Of Hearing : 16.02.2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 19.02.2016 O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri K. Gopal, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Mohandas, D.R
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 3 M/s. JMP Securities Pvt. Ltd. 17.03.2…