Chem Invest Ltd. v. CIT

378 ITR 333Reported decision2013#15741 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Judgments citing Chem Invest Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Dlf Utilities Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are

ITA 6432/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Yagya Saini Kakkar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…dividend income during the year has mechanically proceeded to make disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D. Ld. CIT (A) following the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. in ITA 117/2015 and Chem Invest Ltd. vs. CIT 378 ITR 333 has deleted the said addition. 10. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue submitted that principles of res judicata are not applicable in the income-tax 6 ITA Nos.6431 & 6432/Del./2019 proceedings. She pointed out even the ld. CIT (A) had not examined the factual matrix in the light of the finding of the AO that there was nothing on record…

ACIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Dlf Utilities Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are

ITA 6431/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Yagya Saini Kakkar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Gurgaon vs. Darcl Logistics Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2506/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri K.M.Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Harpal Singh, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 36Section 36(2)Section 37

…7/-. Ld. CIT (A) has restricted the disallowance to the extent of exempt income after following the decision of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the following cases :- 1. Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT in ITA No. 117/2015 2. Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT 378 ITR 333 3. CIT vs. Triveni Engg. & Industriese Ltd. (2010) 8 taxmann. Com Accordingly ground No. 1 raised by the assessee is dismissed. 3. In so far as the addition of Rs. 15,76,774/- made on account of bad debt, the brief facts are that assessee has claimed irrecoverable balances amounting to Rs. 99,68,637/- which have been written off by the appellan…

ACIT, Circle-17(1), New Delhi vs. Modern Info Technology Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6511/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…icer mechanically proceeded to make the disallowance u/s.14A read with Rule 8D and worked out the disallowance at Rs.3,12,87,693/-. 3. Ld. CIT(A) after referring to the various judgments of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT, 378 ITR 333 and catena of other judgments held that no disallowance can be made when there is no exempt income and further Assessing Officer has not been able to establish any nexus between the exempt income if at all earned by the appellant and any expenditure incurred to earn this income. 4. After considering the submissions made by the parties and on per…

Hoovar Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 5797/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Amit Shuklain Ita No. 5797/Del/2015 Assessment Year: 2012-13 Hoovar Services Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dcit 16Th Floor, Dr. Gopal Das Coy. Circle 11(1), Bhawan, 28Th Barakhamba New Delhi Road, New Delhi (Applicant) (Respondent) (Pan: Aaach2344B)

For Appellant: Shri V. Raja Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 41Section 41(1)

…e included in the total income during the relevant previous year, then disallowance u/s 14A cannot be triggered in this year. This proposition has been upheld by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Chem Invest Ltd. vs. CIT, reported in (2013) 378 ITR 333. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court after considering the various decisions came to the following conclusion:- “23. In the context of the facts enumerated hereinbefore the Court answers the question framed by holding that the expression 'does not form part of the total income' in Section 14A of the envisages that there should be an actual receipt of in…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Gateway Distriparks Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5746/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2010-11 Dcit, M/S Gateway Distriparks Circle-3(1), Ltd. B 1/3, Emca House बनाम/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Sahid Bhagatsingh Marg, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Mumbai-400020 Pan No.Aaacg3425C (राज"व /Revenue) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 80I

…consequential to ground no.2. This factual matrix was not controverted by ld. DR. 4.1. Considering the totality of facts and since we have affirmed the stand of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), following the decision from Hon’ble Delhi High Court in 378 ITR 333 (supra), the impugned ground is consequential in nature and therefore, dismissed. Finally, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed. This order was pronounced in the open in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 06/04/2016. (Rajendra) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद"य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER "या"यक सद"य / JU…