Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT

378 ITR 33High Court2015#24 most cited

What is Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

A disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, for expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income cannot be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the relevant previous year.

1,569

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT · Section 14A disallowance · no exempt income · exempt dividend income · expenditure related to exempt income · Section 8D · Section 115JB · Income-tax Act 1961 · Delhi High Court

Also reported as

61 Taxmann.com 118234 Taxmann 761317 ITD 33281 CTR 447

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 8DSection 115JBSection 250Section 1961Section 37(1)Section 143(2)
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

disallowance u/s 14adisallowance under section 14asection 14asection 36(1)(iii)section 115jbrevenue expendituresection 37(1)section 37section 36previous yearscrutiny assessmentsection 115

Judgments citing Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT

ACIT, Central Circle-1, New Delhi vs. Sahara Prime City Ltd., Lucknow

In the result all the appeals preferred by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 5506/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y. 2009-10 A.Y. 2010-11 A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 A.Y. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17

Section 14A

…e. Beside the judgments relied upon by the appellant the facts of the case are also covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28 (Delhi) and Cheminvest Ltd-v- ACIT 378 ITR 33 Delhi wherein it has been held that where the interest free funds available with the assessee were more than investment made in tax free securities, no disallowance under section 14A could be made. The AO has incorrectly made further disallowance on this account in the computation as per Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules. The addition is therefore d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sahara Prime City Ltd., Lucknow

In the result all the appeals preferred by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 6054/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y. 2009-10 A.Y. 2010-11 A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 A.Y. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17

Section 14A

…e. Beside the judgments relied upon by the appellant the facts of the case are also covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28 (Delhi) and Cheminvest Ltd-v- ACIT 378 ITR 33 Delhi wherein it has been held that where the interest free funds available with the assessee were more than investment made in tax free securities, no disallowance under section 14A could be made. The AO has incorrectly made further disallowance on this account in the computation as per Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules. The addition is therefore d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sahara Prime City Ltd., Lucknow

In the result all the appeals preferred by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 5601/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y. 2009-10 A.Y. 2010-11 A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 A.Y. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17

Section 14A

…e. Beside the judgments relied upon by the appellant the facts of the case are also covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28 (Delhi) and Cheminvest Ltd-v- ACIT 378 ITR 33 Delhi wherein it has been held that where the interest free funds available with the assessee were more than investment made in tax free securities, no disallowance under section 14A could be made. The AO has incorrectly made further disallowance on this account in the computation as per Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules. The addition is therefore d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sahara Prime City Ltd., Lucknow

In the result all the appeals preferred by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3234/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y. 2009-10 A.Y. 2010-11 A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 A.Y. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17

Section 14A

…e. Beside the judgments relied upon by the appellant the facts of the case are also covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28 (Delhi) and Cheminvest Ltd-v- ACIT 378 ITR 33 Delhi wherein it has been held that where the interest free funds available with the assessee were more than investment made in tax free securities, no disallowance under section 14A could be made. The AO has incorrectly made further disallowance on this account in the computation as per Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules. The addition is therefore d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sahara Prime City Ltd., Lucknow

In the result all the appeals preferred by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 72/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y. 2009-10 A.Y. 2010-11 A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 A.Y. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17

Section 14A

…e. Beside the judgments relied upon by the appellant the facts of the case are also covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28 (Delhi) and Cheminvest Ltd-v- ACIT 378 ITR 33 Delhi wherein it has been held that where the interest free funds available with the assessee were more than investment made in tax free securities, no disallowance under section 14A could be made. The AO has incorrectly made further disallowance on this account in the computation as per Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules. The addition is therefore d…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sahara Prime City Ltd., Lucknow

In the result all the appeals preferred by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 6242/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Oct 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesha.Y. 2009-10 A.Y. 2010-11 A.Y. 2011-12 A.Y. 2012-13 A.Y. 2013-14 A.Y. 2014-15 A.Y. 2015-16 A.Y. 2016-17

Section 14A

…e. Beside the judgments relied upon by the appellant the facts of the case are also covered in favour of the appellant by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28 (Delhi) and Cheminvest Ltd-v- ACIT 378 ITR 33 Delhi wherein it has been held that where the interest free funds available with the assessee were more than investment made in tax free securities, no disallowance under section 14A could be made. The AO has incorrectly made further disallowance on this account in the computation as per Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules. The addition is therefore d…

Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank, Raipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 170/RPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Oct 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 170/Rpr/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Chhattisgarh Gramin Bank C/O. Chhattisgarh Rajya Gramin Bank, Corporate Office, Sector-24, Plot No.47, Atal Nagar, Naya Raipur Raipur (C.G.)-492 018 Pan : Aaajc0574H .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri B. Subramanyam, CAFor Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ct was called for in its hands, had relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxmann 2 (SC) and that of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Limited Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi). 8. Per contra, the Ld. Departmental Representative (for short, ‘DR’) relied on the orders of the lower authorities. It was submitted by him that pursuant to the “Explanation” to Sec. 14A of the Act, as had been available on the statute vide the Finance Act, 2022, the legislature had clarified that the provisions of Section 14A would be a…

Abis Export India Pvt. Ltd., Rajnandgaon vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Bhilai, Durg

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 194/RPR/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur17 Oct 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No. 194/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2018-19 Abis Export India Pvt. Ltd. Vs The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Ib, Corporate House, Indamara, Tax, Circle-1(1), Bhilai Rajnandgaon (C.G.)-491 441 Pan: Aacca2881J (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. िनधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Bikram Jain, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Smt. Ila M. Parmar, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 22/08/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17/10/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am: The Captioned Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Passed By The Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Nfac, Delhi U/S. 263 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) Dated 28.03.2023 For A.Y.2018-19. The Grounds Of The Appeal Raised By The Assessee Are As Under: “1. On The Fact & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Principal Commissioner Of Income Tax—Raipur-1 Has Erred In Holding The Assessment Order Passed By The National E-Assessment Centre (Neac) On 01.03.2021 As Erroneous & Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue As The Order Was Passed Without Making Any Enquiry On The Issues Of Applicability Of Section 14A Of The I. T. Act, 1961. The Assessment Order Passed By The Neac Is Neither Erroneous Nor Prejudicial To The Interest Of Revenue & Therefore The Order U/S 263 Passed By The Ld. Cit Is Unjustified, Unwarranted & Uncalled. 2. The Assessee Reserves The Right To Add, Amend Or Alter Any Grounds Of Appeal At Any Time Of Hearing.”

For Appellant: Shri Bikram Jain, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Ila M. Parmar, CIT-DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 801ASection 80I

…its hand. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 257 Taxmann 2 (SC) and also of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Limited Vs. CIT, (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi). Backed by the aforesaid judicial pronouncements, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that as per the settled position of law no disallowance u/s.14A in absence of any exempt income could have been made in the hands of the assessee. In the backdrop of the facts involved in the case before us read with the aforesaid settled position of law we fi…

Innovative B2B Logistics Solutions P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-4, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4997/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: the ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) granted relief by placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandip Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4823/Del./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16) Addl.CIT, Spl. Range 4, vs. Innovative B2B Logistics New Delhi. Solutions P. Ltd., Level-4, Rectangle 1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi – 110 017. (PAN : AABCI5215M) ITA No.4997/Del./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16) Innovative B2B Logistics vs. Addl.CIT, Spl. Range 4, Solutions P. Ltd., New Delhi. Level-4, Rectangle 1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi – 110 017. (PAN : AABCI5215M) (APPELLANT) (RES…

Addl.CIT, Special Range-4, New Delhi vs. Innovative B2B Logistics Solutions P.Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue and assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4823/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: the ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) granted relief by placing reliance on the decisions of Hon’ble

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sandip Kumar Mishra, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR US, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4823/Del./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16) Addl.CIT, Spl. Range 4, vs. Innovative B2B Logistics New Delhi. Solutions P. Ltd., Level-4, Rectangle 1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi – 110 017. (PAN : AABCI5215M) ITA No.4997/Del./2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015-16) Innovative B2B Logistics vs. Addl.CIT, Spl. Range 4, Solutions P. Ltd., New Delhi. Level-4, Rectangle 1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi – 110 017. (PAN : AABCI5215M) (APPELLANT) (RES…

DCIT, Central Circle-1(3), Hyderabad vs. Viz Infra Consultants Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 319/HYD/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri H. Srinivasulu, ARFor Respondent: Ms. Sheetal Sarin, DR
Section 14A

…d for the assessment year 2013-14 also. 4. Per contra, learned AR, placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT vs. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. (2022) 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi) and Cheminvest Ltd., Vs. CIT (2015) [378 ITR 33] (Del) and submitted that the amendment referred to by the learned DR by way of Finance Act, 2022 is only prospective in nature and in view of the decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., (supra), no disallowance could be made by invoking 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D Page 2 of 5 of the Rules, if the assessee does not earn any exempt income du…

Sh. Nawal Kishore Dangayach, A-34-A, Ram Nagar, Shastri Nagar, Jaipur vs. ACIT, Circle-4, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 304/JPR/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Oct 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary ( Addl. CIT) a
Section 14ASection 37

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA. No. 304/JP/2023 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2016-17 cuke Sh. Nawal Kishore Dangayach ACIT, A-34-A, Ram Nagar, Shastri Vs. Circle-4, Jaipur. Nagar, Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: ABXPD 6074 D vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Reve…

Rig Consultants Private Limited, Kolkata vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(1), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan

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

ITA 804/KOL/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata09 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2014-15 Rig Consultants Private Limited Ito, Ward-4(1), Kolkata 6Th Floor, New India Assurance Vs. Building, 4Th Lyons Range, Kolkata- 700001. Pan: Aadcr 1618 R (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Appellant By : Shri Sunil Surana, Ar Respondent By : Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, Jcit, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 20.09.2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 09.10.2023 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: This Appeal Of The Assessee For The Assessment Year 2014-15 Is Directed Against The Order Dated 27.01.2023 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Appeals, Nfac, Delhi [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The ‘Ld. Cit(A)’]. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.B. Chakraborthy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 193Section 194ASection 194CSection 194J

…mpt income, disallowance u/s 14A Rule 8D of the Act is not permissible. Further reliance was placed on the following cases: “(i) Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs Ballarpur Industries Ltd. (85 taxmann.com 13) ii. Cheminvest Limited vs CIT-4 (Delhi HC) (378 ITR 33)” 6. On the other hand, ld. DR supports the decision rendered by the authorities below. 7. We, after hearing the rival submissions of the parties and perusing the material available on record, find that assessee had not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration and it was also accepted by the ld. AO while framing the assessmen…

Bhandara Urban Co-Op Bank, Bhandara vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 2(3), Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 20/NAG/2021[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Oct 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.19 & 20/Nag/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Bhandara Urban Co-Operative The Acit, Circle-2, Bank Ltd., V Nagpur. C/O.Mukesh Agrawal, S R.S.Bhattad & Associates, 33-A, Central Bazar Road, Ramdaspeth, Nagpur – 440010. Pan: Aaaft 7398 G Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Saket Bhatted – Ar Revenue By Dr. Kaumudi Patil- Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Were Heard Together As Common Issue Is Involved. Both These Appeals Are Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Nagpur Dated 29.03.2019 For A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 Emanating From Two Different Assessment Orders Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…n admitted position that the assessee, in fact, did not earn any exempt income from the investment made in Marigold Properties during the year under consideration. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 118/234 Taxman 761/378 ITR 33 has held that if there is no exempt income, there can be no question of making any disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India (P.) Ltd . [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28. More recently the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Pr. CIT v. Kohinoor Projects (P.) Ltd . [2021] 276 Taxman…

Bhandara Urban Co-Op. Bank Ltd, Bhandara vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 19/NAG/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Nagpur09 Oct 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.19 & 20/Nag/2021 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 Bhandara Urban Co-Operative The Acit, Circle-2, Bank Ltd., V Nagpur. C/O.Mukesh Agrawal, S R.S.Bhattad & Associates, 33-A, Central Bazar Road, Ramdaspeth, Nagpur – 440010. Pan: Aaaft 7398 G Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By Shri Saket Bhatted – Ar Revenue By Dr. Kaumudi Patil- Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 21/09/2023 Date Of Pronouncement 09/10/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Two Appeals Were Heard Together As Common Issue Is Involved. Both These Appeals Are Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Nagpur Dated 29.03.2019 For A.Y. 2013-14 & 2014-15 Emanating From Two Different Assessment Orders Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…n admitted position that the assessee, in fact, did not earn any exempt income from the investment made in Marigold Properties during the year under consideration. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 118/234 Taxman 761/378 ITR 33 has held that if there is no exempt income, there can be no question of making any disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT v. Holcim India (P.) Ltd . [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28. More recently the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Pr. CIT v. Kohinoor Projects (P.) Ltd . [2021] 276 Taxman…

Electronica Machine Tools Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(1), Pune

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

ITA 351/PUN/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune20 Sept 2023AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Suhas B Bora, CAFor Respondent: Shri Keyur Patel, CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 35(1)Section 37Section 37(1)

…t of exempt income earned. We observe that this issue is no more res-integra and has been answered in favour of the assessee in various decisions of the Hon'ble High Courts as well as the Tribunal. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del.) has held that if there is no exempt income, there can be no question of making any disallowance u/sec. 14A of the Act. Similar view has been taken by 2 Electronica Machine Tools Ltd. the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Holcim India P. Ltd. [2014] 90 CCH 81 (Del. HC). Meaning thereby, the disallowance u/sec. 14A has to be rest…

Aarti Sponge and Power Ltd., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, -1(1), Raipur

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

ITA 70/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.70/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. Aarti Sponge & Power Ltd. Acit -1 (1) Aarti House, Ashoka Ratna Shankar Raipur Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh – 492 001

For Respondent: Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…ettinad Logistics (P) Ltd - [2018] 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC), 257 Taxman 2 (SC) SLP dismissed against High Court ruling that section 14A cannot be invoked where no exempt income was earned by assessee in relevant assessment year.  Cheminvest Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del.).  Nutan Ispat & Power P. Ltd vs DCIT in ITA no. 80/RPR/2016 dt 17.08.2018 :: 6 :: In this case, jurisdictional Raipur Bench of ITAT held vide para 7 that where the assessee has not received any exempt income, disallowance u/s 14A cannot be made. While so holding, Hon'ble Tribunal followed the decision in the case of Chettinad Logistics P.…

Hira Infra-Tek Ltd., Raipur vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statical purposes, in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 77/RPR/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur15 Sept 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.77/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 V. Hira Infra-Tek Limited Acit Hira Arcade Near New Bus Stand, Circle – 1(1) Pandri, Raipur Raipur

For Respondent: Shri Satya Prakash Sharma
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…f Rs.3,82,401/-. We, thus, in terms of our aforesaid observations, are of the considered view that the addition should be restricted to the extent of exempt income i.e. Rs.3,82,401/-. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the judgment Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) has held that if there is no exempt income, there cannot be any disallowance u/s 14A. Similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. (2014) 90CCH 081-DelHC. The net effect of these decisions is that the disallowance u/s 14A gets restricted to the extent of exempt income, even if the provisions of…

Citrus Check Inns Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 1018/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hiro Rai a/w Ms. Ritu PunjabiFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sareen
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.1015/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Citrus Check Inns Limited 203–B, Parvati Industrial Estate ……………. Appellant Sunmill Compound, Lower Parel (West) Mumbai 400 013 PAN – AAECC5606P v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Central Circle–2(1), Mumbai ITA no.1016/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Citrus Check Inns Limited 203–B, Parvati Industrial Estate ……………. Appellant Sunmill Compound, Lower Parel (West) Mumbai 400 013 PAN – AAECC…

Citrus Check Inns Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Central Circle-2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee for A

ITA 1017/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hiro Rai a/w Ms. Ritu PunjabiFor Respondent: Shri Manish Sareen
Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA no.1015/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2012–13) Citrus Check Inns Limited 203–B, Parvati Industrial Estate ……………. Appellant Sunmill Compound, Lower Parel (West) Mumbai 400 013 PAN – AAECC5606P v/s Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax ……………. Respondent Central Circle–2(1), Mumbai ITA no.1016/Mum./2019 (Assessment Year : 2013–14) Citrus Check Inns Limited 203–B, Parvati Industrial Estate ……………. Appellant Sunmill Compound, Lower Parel (West) Mumbai 400 013 PAN – AAECC…