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

Idea Cellular Limited, Mumbai vs. Dy. Comm of Income Tax-Circle 3(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 3424/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Shri J. D. Mistry /Manish PadhiarFor Respondent: Shri T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 194Section 250Section 40

…Trust Association [1992] 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in IL & FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. (supra) and Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 118/234 Taxman 761/378 ITR 33 (Delhi). 10. Accordingly, the appeal and application are dismissed. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeal shall abide by the final decision of the Supreme Court in the SLP filed in the case of IL & FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. (supra).” 5.3 Respectfully following the same, we direct the ld. AO to delete the disal…

DCIT, Circle-14(1)(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Priviege Industries Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1292/MUM/2023[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Jul 2023AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Kuldip Singhassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri H.M. Bhatt, Sr. A.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…that the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration. 6. In the light of the aforesaid undisputed facts the Ld. CIT(A) by relaying upon the decision rendered by Honourable Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) proceeded to delete the deletion on the ground that in the absence of any exempt income no disallowance can be made under section 14A. So in these circumstances we do not find any ground to interfere into the deletion of addition made by the Ld. CIT(A). So ground No.1 is decided against the Revenue. Ground No.2 7. The AO made disallowance…

DCIT, Central Circle-2, Delhi vs. Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd., Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 and appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are dismissed

ITA 2051/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Singh Kothari, CIT DR DR
Section 144Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2017-18 DCIT, Central Vs. Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Circle-2, Delhi H-1, Zamrudpur Community Centre, Kailash Colony, New Delhi – 110 048 PAN AAACM0846P (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2017-18 Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-2, H-1, Zamrudpur Community New Delhi Centre, Kailash Colony, New Delhi – 110 048 PAN AAACM0846P (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. year 2018-19 Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-2, H-1, Zamrudpur Community New…

Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Central Circle-2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 and appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are dismissed

ITA 1569/DEL/2021[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Singh Kothari, CIT DR DR
Section 144Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2017-18 DCIT, Central Vs. Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Circle-2, Delhi H-1, Zamrudpur Community Centre, Kailash Colony, New Delhi – 110 048 PAN AAACM0846P (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2017-18 Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-2, H-1, Zamrudpur Community New Delhi Centre, Kailash Colony, New Delhi – 110 048 PAN AAACM0846P (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. year 2018-19 Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-2, H-1, Zamrudpur Community New…

Mideast Integrated Steels Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, CC-2, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue for assessment year 2017-18 and appeal of the assessee for assessment year 2017-18 and 2018-19 are dismissed

ITA 1568/DEL/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri Amit Shuklaasstt. Year: 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Salil Aggarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dilip Singh Kothari, CIT DR DR
Section 144Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36

…INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “E”: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE PRESIDENT AND SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Asstt. Year: 2017-18 DCIT, Central Vs. Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Circle-2, Delhi H-1, Zamrudpur Community Centre, Kailash Colony, New Delhi – 110 048 PAN AAACM0846P (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. Year 2017-18 Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-2, H-1, Zamrudpur Community New Delhi Centre, Kailash Colony, New Delhi – 110 048 PAN AAACM0846P (Appellant) (Respondent) Asstt. year 2018-19 Mindeast Integrated Steels Ltd. Vs. ACIT, CC-2, H-1, Zamrudpur Community New…

M/S. Bhatia Global Trading Ltd., Indore vs. The DCIT 1(1), Indore

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 247/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore26 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri B.M. Biyanibhatia Global Trading Ltd. Dcit 1(1) Through Official Liquidator Indore Old Cia Building, 1St Floor Vs. Opp. G.P.O. Residency Area, Indore (Appellant / Assessee) (Respondent/ Revenue) Pan: Aaacb6751 C Assessee By None Revenue By Shri P.K. Mishra, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing 10.05.2023 Date Of Pronouncement 26 .07.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14A

…, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, (2015) 378 ITR 33. 10. Accordingly, the appeal and application are dismissed. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeal shall abide by the final decision of the Supreme Court in the SLP filed in the case of PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra).” 18. Accordingly by following the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in c…

E H Building Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. ITO, Corporate Ward 2(1), Chennai

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

ITA 459/CHNY/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai19 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Raoआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.459/Chny/2023 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 Eh Building Consultancy Pvt. Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Flat No. 1C, First Floor, Gowri Chitra Corporate Ward 2(1), Garden Complex, 88/4, Arcot Road, Chennai. Vadapalani, Chennai 600 026. [Pan:Aabce8062E] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri G. Tarun, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 13.07.2023 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 19.07.2023 आदेश /O R D E R This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre [Nfac], Delhi Dated 15.02.2023 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Has Filed The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2012-13 On 30.09.2012 With Returned Income Of ₹.Nil. The Return Of Income Was Processed Under Section 143(1) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [“Act” In Short] Dated 15.03.2013. Thereafter, The Case Was Selected For Scrutiny Through Nd Notice Under 2

For Appellant: Shri G. Tarun, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, (2015) 378 ITR 33. 10. Accordingly, the appeal and application are dismissed. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeal shall abide by the final decision of the Supreme Court in the SLP filed in the case of PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra). 7. After hearing rival contentions and going through the decision of Hon’ble…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, (Central)-I, Raipur vs. Mesers Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 92/RPR/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.91 & 92/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited. 142, Sahid Smarak, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7479G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Puja Bajaj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40

…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 company. We, thus, In the backdrop of the facts involved in the case before us r/w. the aforesaid settled position…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-I, Raipur vs. Mesers Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited, Raipur

In the result, appeal of the revenue in ITA No

ITA 91/RPR/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur18 Jul 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.91 & 92/Rpr/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2012-13 & 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-1, Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Chhattisgarh Steel & Power Limited. 142, Sahid Smarak, G.E Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaccc7479G ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Puja Bajaj, CAFor Respondent: Shri Piyush Tripathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40

…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 company. We, thus, In the backdrop of the facts involved in the case before us r/w. the aforesaid settled position…

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1320/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2014-15 Addl. Cit Special Range-4 Innovative B2B Logistics New Delhi Vs Solutions (P) Ltd. Level-4, Rectangle -1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi -110017 Pan No.Aabci5215M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Innovative B2B Logistics Addl. Cit Special Range-4 Solutions (P) Ltd. Level-4, Vs New Delhi Rectangle -1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi -110017 Pan No.Aabci5215M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…ssee challenged the addition before the CIT(A) and once again contended that it has earned no exempt income. 7. After considering the facts and the submissions and after drawing support from decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. 378 ITR 33 the CIT(A) deleted the impugned addition. 8. Before us the DR strongly supported the findings of the AO. 9. Per contra the Counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the lower authorities. 10. The assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration is not disputed, therefore, the ratio laiddown by…

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

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1140/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaassessment Year: 2014-15 Addl. Cit Special Range-4 Innovative B2B Logistics New Delhi Vs Solutions (P) Ltd. Level-4, Rectangle -1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi -110017 Pan No.Aabci5215M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2014-15 Innovative B2B Logistics Addl. Cit Special Range-4 Solutions (P) Ltd. Level-4, Vs New Delhi Rectangle -1, Commercial Complex, D-4, Saket, New Delhi -110017 Pan No.Aabci5215M (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…ssee challenged the addition before the CIT(A) and once again contended that it has earned no exempt income. 7. After considering the facts and the submissions and after drawing support from decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. 378 ITR 33 the CIT(A) deleted the impugned addition. 8. Before us the DR strongly supported the findings of the AO. 9. Per contra the Counsel for the assessee reiterated what has been stated before the lower authorities. 10. The assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration is not disputed, therefore, the ratio laiddown by…

M/S. Calcutta Springs Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC- 1(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 769/KOL/2022[2019-2020]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2023AY 2019-2020

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, (2015) 378 ITR 33. 10. Accordingly, the appeal and application are dismissed. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeal shall abide by the final decision of the Supreme Court in the SLP filed in the case of PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra). MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J JULY 20, 2022”. 10. Respectfully…

M/S. Calcutta Springs Ltd., Kolkata vs. D.C.I.T., CC- 1(2), Kolkata

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

ITA 767/KOL/2022[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Jul 2023AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)

…, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, (2015) 378 ITR 33. 10. Accordingly, the appeal and application are dismissed. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeal shall abide by the final decision of the Supreme Court in the SLP filed in the case of PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra). MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J JULY 20, 2022”. 10. Respectfully…

M/S. Bengal Shristi Infrastructure Development Ltd., Durgapur vs. A.C.I.T., Circle - 2, Durgapur

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

ITA 534/KOL/2022[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Jul 2023AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 14ASection 250

…, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, (2015) 378 ITR 33. 10. Accordingly, the appeal and application are dismissed. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeal shall abide by the final decision of the Supreme Court in the SLP filed in the case of PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra). MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J JULY 20, 2022”. 7. Respectfully…

Graphite India Ltd., Kolkata vs. Pr.CIT-4, Kolkata

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

ITA 1013/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 Jul 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice- & Shri Rajesh Kumar

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 263(1)Section 40A(2)(b)

…, Madras (1992) 3 SCC 1, the present appeal is dismissed being covered by the judgment passed by the learned predecessor Division Bench in PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra) and Cheminvest Limited vs. Commissioner of Income Tax-VI, (2015) 378 ITR 33. 10. Accordingly, the appeal and application are dismissed. However, it is clarified that the order passed in the present appeal shall abide by the final decision of the Supreme Court in the SLP filed in the case of PCIT vs. IL & FS Energy Development Company Ltd (supra). MANMOHAN, J MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA, J JULY 20, 2022”. 21 Assessment Y…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (Cg) vs. M/S Vandana Vidyut Limited, Raipur (Cg)

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

ITA 138/BIL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur03 Jul 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.138/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. Vandana Vidyut Limited Vandana Building, M.G Road, Jawahar Nagar, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aaacv7850L ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri V.K Singh, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250(4)Section 68

…company. 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). At the same time, we find substance in the claim of the Ld. DR that the fact that the assessee company was not in receipt of any exempt income during the year under consideration, is not discernible from the record. 15. Considering the aforesaid factual position, we are of the considered view that the matter requires to be restored to th…

Seven Hills Bytes Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-1(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 246/KOL/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. Manish Boradi.T.A No.246/Kol/2023 Assessment Year: 2015-16 Seven Hills Bytes Pvt. Ltd....………………................................……Appellant 156A, Lenin Sarani, 1St Floor, Kolkata-700013. [Pan: Aakcs4244B] Vs. Dcit, Circle-1(1), Kolkata….…….............……........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri Miraj D. Shah, Ar, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. Cit- Sr. Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 09, 2023 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 27, 2023 आदेश / Order संजय गग", "या"यक सद"य "वारा / Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 03.02.2023 Of The National Faceless Appeal Centre (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Cit(A)’) Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Assailed The Action Of The Lower Authorities In Making/Confirming The Addition Of Rs.1,31,797/- U/S 14A Of The Act In Respect Of Notional Expenses Incurred For Earning Of Exempt Income. At The Outset, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Invited Our Attention To Para 5 Of The Impugned Order Of The Cit(A) To Submit That The Undisputed Fact Is That The Assessee Has Not Earned Any Exempt

Section 14ASection 250

…mit that the undisputed fact is that the assessee has not earned any exempt I.T.A No.246/Kol/2023 Assessment year: 2015-16 Seven Hills Bytes Pvt. Ltd income during the year. He in this respect has relied upon the following case laws: Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 (Del). CIT vs. M/s. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. in ITA no. 486/2014 and ITA no. 299/2014; Judgment dt. 5-9-2014 CIT v. Shivam Motors (P.) Ltd. [2015] 230 Taxman 63 CIT vs. Ashika Global Securities Ltd. (G.A. No. 2122 of 2014) dt. 11/06/2018 In these case laws, Hon’ble High Courts have been unanimous to hold that where the assessee has not derived any t…

DCIT, CC-6(4), Mumbai vs. Ajay Shankarlal Mittal, Mumbai

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

ITA 1034/MUM/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmandcit, Cc – 6(4) Ajayshankarlalmittal, Room No. 1925, 19Th 62-A, Mittal Bhavan, बनाम/ Floor, Air India Bldg Dr.Gopalrao Vs. Nariman Point, Deshmukh Road, Mumbai – 400021. Peddar Road, Mumbai- 400026. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagpm6550R (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr.Ujjawal Kumar .DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…or to insertion of explanation to section 14A. In this view of the matter, and in the light of consistent stand by co-ordinate benches, following Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in the case of Cheminvest Ltd v. CIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 118/234 Taxman 761/378 ITR 33, we uphold the plea of the assessee that no disallowance under section 14A was and in the circumstances of the case. The plea of the Assessing Officer is thus rejected". 7.8 The same view that the insertion of the explanation in section 14A is prospective in nature has also been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Era Infrastructur…

DCIT, CC-6(4), Mumbai vs. Archana Ajay Mittal, Mumbai

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

ITA 1032/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmanthe Dcit, Cc-6(4) Archana Ajay Mittal Room No. 1925, 19Th 302, Level-3, Ceejay बनाम/ Floor Air India Bldg, House, Anne Besant Vs. Nariman Point, Road, Worli, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400018 "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagpm6545C (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Ms.Kavita Kaushik.DRFor Respondent: None
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250Section 57

…prior to insertion of explanation to section 14AIn this view of the matter, and in the light of consistent stand by co-ordinate benches, following Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vCIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 118/234 Taxman 761/378 ITR 33, we uphold the plea of the assesseethat no disallowance under section 14A was and in the circumstances of the case. The plea of the Assessing Officer is thus rejected". 5.10 The same view that the insertion of the explanation in section 14A is prospective in nature has also been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Era Infrastructu…

Mrs Aruna Paresh Patel, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), NFAC, Mumbai

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

ITA 1015/MUM/2023[2016-2017]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jun 2023AY 2016-2017

Bench: Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Shri S Rifaur Rahmandcit, Cc – 6(4) Ajayshankarlalmittal, Room No. 1925, 19Th 62-A, Mittal Bhavan, बनाम/ Floor, Air India Bldg Dr.Gopalrao Vs. Nariman Point, Deshmukh Road, Mumbai – 400021. Peddar Road, Mumbai- 400026. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aagpm6550R (""थ" / Respondent) (अपीलाथ" /Appellant)

For Appellant: Mr.Ujjawal Kumar .DR
Section 10Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…or to insertion of explanation to section 14A. In this view of the matter, and in the light of consistent stand by co-ordinate benches, following Hon'ble Delhi High Court's judgment in the case of Cheminvest Ltd v. CIT [2015] 61 taxmann.com 118/234 Taxman 761/378 ITR 33, we uphold the plea of the assessee that no disallowance under section 14A was and in the circumstances of the case. The plea of the Assessing Officer is thus rejected". 7.8 The same view that the insertion of the explanation in section 14A is prospective in nature has also been held by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Era Infrastructur…