CCI Ltd. v. JCIT

DCIT 24(2), Mumbai vs. Mudra Securities, Mumbai

Accordingly, Assessee’s appeal A.Y. 2008-09 is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6168/M/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Mudra Securities Jt. Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ 401/402, Business Classic, Tax Range 24(2) Vs. Chincholi Bunder Road, Mumbai Malad (West), Mumbai - 400064

…hile computing the expenditure to earn the exempt income u/s 14A read with Rule A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10 8D of the Act or not. The assessee has also place reliance on the judgement passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCL Ltd. Vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291). On the basis of said judgement co-ordinate bench of Mumbai in case DCIT Range 9(2) Vs. M/s. India Advantage Securities Ltd.,(Supra) dated 14.09.2012 has also held that the expenditure incurred in relation to the stock in trade is not liable to be computed u/s. 14A of the Act. We notice that the decision was rendered in the case of M/s. India Ad…

Mudra Securities, Mumbai vs. Jt, CIT., Range-24(2), Mumbai

Accordingly, Assessee’s appeal A.Y. 2008-09 is partly allowed and Revenue’s appeal for A

Bench: Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No.6168/M/11 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) M/S. Mudra Securities Jt. Commissioner Of Income बनाम/ 401/402, Business Classic, Tax Range 24(2) Vs. Chincholi Bunder Road, Mumbai Malad (West), Mumbai - 400064

…hile computing the expenditure to earn the exempt income u/s 14A read with Rule A.Y. 2008-09 & 2009-10 8D of the Act or not. The assessee has also place reliance on the judgement passed by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of CCL Ltd. Vs. JCIT (250 CTR 291). On the basis of said judgement co-ordinate bench of Mumbai in case DCIT Range 9(2) Vs. M/s. India Advantage Securities Ltd.,(Supra) dated 14.09.2012 has also held that the expenditure incurred in relation to the stock in trade is not liable to be computed u/s. 14A of the Act. We notice that the decision was rendered in the case of M/s. India Ad…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Yes Bank Ltd, Mumbai

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

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3357/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Yes Bank Limited, बनाम/ Addl.Commissioner Of Income 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Tax 7(3), Vs. Discovery Of India Building, Room No.614, 6Th Floor, Dr.A B Road, Worli, Mumbai- Aayakar Bhavan, 400018 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3388/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2008-09) बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Yes Bank Limited, 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Tax 7(3), Vs. Discovery Of India Building, Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Dr.A B Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400018 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…ed to be made even if the interest free funds have been used for making investments. In this regard, he placed reliance on the following case law:- (a) Escorts Ltd (102 TTJ 522) (b) Southern Petro chemical industries (93 TTJ 161) (c) Smt. Leena Ramachandran (339 ITR 293)(Ker). 4. We heard the rival contentions on this issue and perused the record. We agree with the contention of the assessee that no disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(i) and (ii) is required to be made, if the non- interest bearing funds available with the assessee are more than the amount of investment which generate tax free income, since the said v…

Yes Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 7(3), Mumbai

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

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3357/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2008-09) Yes Bank Limited, बनाम/ Addl.Commissioner Of Income 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Tax 7(3), Vs. Discovery Of India Building, Room No.614, 6Th Floor, Dr.A B Road, Worli, Mumbai- Aayakar Bhavan, 400018 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.3388/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year:2008-09) बनाम/ Dy.Commissioner Of Income Yes Bank Limited, 9Th Floor, Nehru Centre, Tax 7(3), Vs. Discovery Of India Building, Room No.615, 6Th Floor, Dr.A B Road, Worli, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400018 M K Road, Mumbai-400020 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…ed to be made even if the interest free funds have been used for making investments. In this regard, he placed reliance on the following case law:- (a) Escorts Ltd (102 TTJ 522) (b) Southern Petro chemical industries (93 TTJ 161) (c) Smt. Leena Ramachandran (339 ITR 293)(Ker). 4. We heard the rival contentions on this issue and perused the record. We agree with the contention of the assessee that no disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(i) and (ii) is required to be made, if the non- interest bearing funds available with the assessee are more than the amount of investment which generate tax free income, since the said v…

Four Dimensions Securities (I) Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 4(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2007-08 M/S Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner Of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 209-Arcadia Building 2Nd 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Floor Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F Assessment Year: 2007-08 Addl. Commissioner Of M/S Four Dimensions Income Tax, Range-4(1), Securities (India) Ltd. बनाम/ 6Th Floor,Aayakar Bhavan, 209-Arcadia Building 2Nd Vs. Mumbai-400020 Floor Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) Pan. No.Aaacf1734F

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,एफ,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “F”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"नी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2007-08 M/s Four Dimensions Addl. Commissioner of Securities (India) Ltd. Income Tax, Range-4(1), बनाम/ 209-Arcadia building 2nd 6th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Floor Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No.AAACF1734F Assessment Year: 2007-08 Addl. Commissioner of M/s Four Dimensions Income…

ACIT Large Tax Payer Unit, Mumbai vs. Union Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4678/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Union Bank Of India, Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu, Central Accounts Department, Vs. World Trade Center, 6Th Floor, Cuff Parade, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Mumbai-400005 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “एफ” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“ F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM AND AMARJIT SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4678/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Union Bank of India, Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU, Central Accounts Department, Vs. World Trade Center, 6th floor, Cuff Parade, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Mumbai-400005 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4842/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner of Union Bank of…

Union Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Ltu, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran, Am & Amarjit Singh, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4678/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Union Bank Of India, Addl. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ltu, Central Accounts Department, Vs. World Trade Center, 6Th Floor, Cuff Parade, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Mumbai-400005 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ..

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “एफ” म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL“ F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE S/SHRI B.R.BASKARAN, AM AND AMARJIT SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4678/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Union Bank of India, Addl. Commissioner of Income Tax, LTU, Central Accounts Department, Vs. World Trade Center, 6th floor, Cuff Parade, 239, Vidhan Bhavan Marg, Mumbai-400005 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.4842/Mum/2013 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Year: 2008-09) बनाम/ Asstt. Commissioner of Union Bank of…

Dcb Bank Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 2(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No. 820/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 Dcb Bank Ltd., The Acit-Circle 2(3), बनाम/ Formerly Development Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Credit Bank Ltd., 6Th Floor, Mumbai-400 020 Peninsulla Business Park, Tower A, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013

…e case of Derive Trading Pvt. Ltd (supra) wherein the Co- ordinate Bench has considered the decision in the case of Rmkumar Venugopal Investments Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT in ITA No. 6324/M/2012, decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCL Ltd. Vs JCIT 250 CTR 291 and also the Third Member decision in the case of D.H. Securities Ltd. Vs DCIT 41 Taxmann.com 352. The relevant part of the decision of the Tribunal reads as under: We may observe that the issue relating to the disallowance under section 14A in relation to shares held in stock in trade was discussed by the co-ordinate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in…

ACIT 2(3), Mumbai vs. Development Credit Bank Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं/ I.Ta No. 820/Mum/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year:2010-11 Dcb Bank Ltd., The Acit-Circle 2(3), बनाम/ Formerly Development Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Credit Bank Ltd., 6Th Floor, Mumbai-400 020 Peninsulla Business Park, Tower A, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400 013

…e case of Derive Trading Pvt. Ltd (supra) wherein the Co- ordinate Bench has considered the decision in the case of Rmkumar Venugopal Investments Pvt. Ltd Vs ACIT in ITA No. 6324/M/2012, decision of Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CCL Ltd. Vs JCIT 250 CTR 291 and also the Third Member decision in the case of D.H. Securities Ltd. Vs DCIT 41 Taxmann.com 352. The relevant part of the decision of the Tribunal reads as under: We may observe that the issue relating to the disallowance under section 14A in relation to shares held in stock in trade was discussed by the co-ordinate bench of Mumbai Tribunal in…

DCIT 7(2), Mumbai vs. Srk Business Venture P.Ltd, Mumbai

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya, Am & Shri Sanjay Garg, Jm आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.6446/Mum/2013 ("नधा"रण "नधा"रण "नधा"रण वष" "नधा"रण वष" वष" / Assessment Year :2009-10) वष" Dcit-7(2), Mumbai Vs. M/S Srk Business Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Unit- 302, Apple Plaza, 3Rd Floor, Senapati Bapat Marg, Dadar(W), Mumbai-400028 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aakcs 9305 H .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) राज"व क" क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Revenue By ओर : Shri Premanand J. "नधा"रती क" क" क" ओर क" ओर ओर सेसेसेसे /Assessee By ओर : Shri K. Gopal सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 22/09/2015 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement 04/11/2015 आदेश आदेश / O R D E R आदेश आदेश Per Sanjay Garg: The Revenue Has Filed This Appeal Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13 [Hereinafter Referred To As The Cit(A)] , Mumbai, Dated 22-8-2013, For The Assessment Year 2009-10. 2. The Revenue, In This Appeal, Is Aggrieved By The Action Of The Cit(A) In Restricting The Disallowance U/S.14A R.W.Rule 8D(2)(I) At Rs.69,063/- As Against Disallowance Of Rs.30,57,179/- Made By The Ao. 3. The Facts In Brief Are That During The Relevant Previous Year, The Assessee Received Exempt Income Being Dividend Of Rs.37,942/-. During The Course Of Assessment Proceedings, The Ao Asked The Assessee As To Why The Disallowance Of Interest & Other Expenditure Should Not Be Made U/S.14A. In Response To This, The Assessee Filed His Reply, However

…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 “CCL 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…

Asst.C.I.T. 2(1), Mumbai vs. Bank of Baroda, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed in the same lines

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Bank Of Baroda, Addl. Cit, Range – 2(1), C-26, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Aayakar Bhavan, Queens Road, Complex, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaacb 1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 2(1), M/S. Bank Of Baroda, Aayakar Bhavan, C-26, G-Block, Baroda R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Corporate Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaacb 1534F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…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 “CCL 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…

Bank of Baroda, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 2(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is treated as allowed in the same lines

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargassessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Bank Of Baroda, Addl. Cit, Range – 2(1), C-26, G-Block, Bandra Kurla Aayakar Bhavan, Queens Road, Complex, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaacb 1534F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 Acit 2(1), M/S. Bank Of Baroda, Aayakar Bhavan, C-26, G-Block, Baroda R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Corporate Centre, Vs. M.K. Road, Bandra Kurla Complex, Mumbai - 400020 Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan: Aaacb 1534F (Appellant) (Respondent)

…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 “CCL 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…

R.R. Chokhan Stocki Brokers P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 4(2)(3), Mumbai

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

…Mumbai Bench of the Tribunal in the case of DCIT vs. M/s. India Advantage Securities Ltd.,ITA No.6711/Mum/2011 dated 14/09/2011 for assessment year 2008-09 and 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 disallowance made under section 14A of the Act could not made in relation to exempt dividend income received on shares held as stock-in-trade. Ld. Representative for the assessee also pointed out that the Tribunal has considered the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Daga Capital Management Pvt. Ltd.(supra…

Devkant Syntehetics (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed for AY 2009-10 is allowed and the appeals filed for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 are partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran,Am & Lalit Kumar, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.2663, 2664 & 2665/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) बनाम/ Devkant Synthetics (India) Income Tax Officer 3(1)(2), Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai. Vs. 1006, Raheja Centre, 10Th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थधमी रेखध सं./जीआइआय सं./Pan : Aaacd2102K अऩीरधथी ओय से / Appellant By Shri Rajiv Khandelwal प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Rspondent By Ms.Anu Aggarwal सुनवधई की तधयीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.8.2015 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28.10.2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran:

…as stock in trade only. He further submitted that the disallowance as per rule 8D is required to be made only if the shares are held as investments. In support of this proposition, he placed his reliance on the following case law:- (a) CCI Ltd Vs. JCIT (2012)(250 CTR 291) (b) CIT Vs. India Advantage Securities Ltd (ITA No.1131 of 2013 dated 17-03-2015 of Bombay High Court) (c) Ganjam Trading Co. P Ltd Vs. DCIT (ITA No.1384/Mum/2007 dated 20-07-2012) The Ld A.R further submitted that the assessing officer, in the case of India Advantage Securities Ltd (supra) had worked out disallowance as per Rule 8D for the a…

Devkant Syntehetics (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed for AY 2009-10 is allowed and the appeals filed for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 are partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran,Am & Lalit Kumar, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.2663, 2664 & 2665/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) बनाम/ Devkant Synthetics (India) Income Tax Officer 3(1)(2), Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai. Vs. 1006, Raheja Centre, 10Th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थधमी रेखध सं./जीआइआय सं./Pan : Aaacd2102K अऩीरधथी ओय से / Appellant By Shri Rajiv Khandelwal प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Rspondent By Ms.Anu Aggarwal सुनवधई की तधयीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.8.2015 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28.10.2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran:

…as stock in trade only. He further submitted that the disallowance as per rule 8D is required to be made only if the shares are held as investments. In support of this proposition, he placed his reliance on the following case law:- (a) CCI Ltd Vs. JCIT (2012)(250 CTR 291) (b) CIT Vs. India Advantage Securities Ltd (ITA No.1131 of 2013 dated 17-03-2015 of Bombay High Court) (c) Ganjam Trading Co. P Ltd Vs. DCIT (ITA No.1384/Mum/2007 dated 20-07-2012) The Ld A.R further submitted that the assessing officer, in the case of India Advantage Securities Ltd (supra) had worked out disallowance as per Rule 8D for the a…

Devkant Syntehetics (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed for AY 2009-10 is allowed and the appeals filed for AY 2010-11 and 2011-12 are partly allowed

Bench: S/Shri B.R.Baskaran,Am & Lalit Kumar, Jm आमकय अऩीर सं./I.T.A. No.2663, 2664 & 2665/Mum/2015 (ननधधायण वषा / Assessment Years: 2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12) बनाम/ Devkant Synthetics (India) Income Tax Officer 3(1)(2), Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai. Vs. 1006, Raheja Centre, 10Th Floor, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) .. स्थधमी रेखध सं./जीआइआय सं./Pan : Aaacd2102K अऩीरधथी ओय से / Appellant By Shri Rajiv Khandelwal प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Rspondent By Ms.Anu Aggarwal सुनवधई की तधयीख / Date Of Hearing : 19.8.2015 घोषणध की तधयीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 28.10.2015 आदेश / O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran:

…as stock in trade only. He further submitted that the disallowance as per rule 8D is required to be made only if the shares are held as investments. In support of this proposition, he placed his reliance on the following case law:- (a) CCI Ltd Vs. JCIT (2012)(250 CTR 291) (b) CIT Vs. India Advantage Securities Ltd (ITA No.1131 of 2013 dated 17-03-2015 of Bombay High Court) (c) Ganjam Trading Co. P Ltd Vs. DCIT (ITA No.1384/Mum/2007 dated 20-07-2012) The Ld A.R further submitted that the assessing officer, in the case of India Advantage Securities Ltd (supra) had worked out disallowance as per Rule 8D for the a…

Ashok Kumar Damani, Mumbai vs. ACIT 4(1), Mumbai

Appeal is allowed in favour of assessee

Bench: S/Sh. Rajendra & Parthasarathy Choudhuryअपील सं/.Ita No.1244/Mum/2012,िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year-2008-09

…tion, that majority of the shares formed part of the stock, that the average investment of the assessee was Rs.32.52 crores, that the disallowance calculated on the part of the investment would not be more than Rs.15,320/-.He relied upon the case of CCI Ltd. (206 Taxmann 563) and Smt. Leena Ramachandra (supra). Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order of the FAA. 5.We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the AO had computed the disallowance considering the provisions of section 14A r.w. Rule 8D, that the assessee had submitted that shares held by it we…