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

Addl. CIT, Special Range-3, New Delhi vs. Fortis Healthcare Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7338/DEL/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2023AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri R. M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. James Singson, CIT(DR)
Section 14A

…tted that the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year therefore the ld. CIT(A) was right in deleting the addition by following the judgments of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi in particularly in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs .CIT 378 ITR 33 (Del.). 4. On careful consideration of above, we are inclined to hold that undisputedly rather admittedly the assessee has not earned and claimed any exempt income therefore in view of prepositions rendered by Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court of Delhi including the judgment in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (supra) no disallowance u/s. 14A o…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhilai vs. Mesers Metex Engineers, Bhilai

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 247/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 68

…he year under consideration had not earned any exempt income, the authorities below had erred in working out disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. To support the contention Ld AR relied upon the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 ( Delhi) (ii) Pr. CIT Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corporation Ltd. (2021) 127 taxmann.com 115 ( Karnataka) (iii) Pr. CIT Vs. Kohinoor Project (P) Ltd. (2020) 425 ITR 700 ( Bom.) (iv) Pr. CIT Vs. HSBC Invest Direct (India) Ltd. (2020) 421 ITR 125 (Bom.) 11,4 Ld AR further submitted that in a case decided by the coordinate bench of ITAT Raipur on…

Mesers Metex Engineers, Bhilai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhilai

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 238/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 68

…he year under consideration had not earned any exempt income, the authorities below had erred in working out disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. To support the contention Ld AR relied upon the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 ( Delhi) (ii) Pr. CIT Vs. Karnataka State Financial Corporation Ltd. (2021) 127 taxmann.com 115 ( Karnataka) (iii) Pr. CIT Vs. Kohinoor Project (P) Ltd. (2020) 425 ITR 700 ( Bom.) (iv) Pr. CIT Vs. HSBC Invest Direct (India) Ltd. (2020) 421 ITR 125 (Bom.) 11,4 Ld AR further submitted that in a case decided by the coordinate bench of ITAT Raipur on…

Shah Govardhandas Bhikaridas, Jalgaon vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(4), Jalgaon

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 473/PUN/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal

Section 14ASection 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, VICE PRESIDENT आयकर अपील सं. /ITA No.473/PUN/2023 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Shah Govardhandas Bhikaridas Vs. ITO, (HUF), Ward-2(4), 88, Gujarathi Galli, Jalgaon Chopda, Dist. Jalgaon – 425107, Maharashtra PAN : AAEHS8978P Appellant Respondent Assessee by Smt. Deepa Khare Revenue by Shri Gurmel Singh Date of hearing 09-06-2023 Date of pronouncement 09-06-2023 आदेश / ORDER PER R.S. SYAL, VP: This appeal by the assessee arises out of the order dated 28-03-2023 passed by the CIT(A) in National Faceless Appeal Centre, Del…

Lintas India Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT, Circle- 16(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2018/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 Jun 2023AY 2018-19
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 92CSection 92C(1)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘ D‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHULKA, (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND MS. PADMAVATHY S. (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Lintas India Private Limited, Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income- A-Wing, 16th Floor, Parinee tax, circle 16(1), Mumbai Crescenzo, Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400 051 PAN : AAACL0124F (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ajit Kumar Jain / Siddhesh Chaugule Revenue by Shri Uodal Raj Singh – Sr.DR Date of Hearing 26/04/2023 Date of Pronouncement 01/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R PER PADMAVATHY S. (A.M): This appeal is against the final order of assess…

M/S. Podar Advisory & Consulting Enterprise P Ltd., Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer-2(2)(4), Mumbai

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

ITA 162/MUM/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2023AY 2016-17
For Appellant: Shri Bharat Andhale
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…20) 421 ITR 125 (Bom.) wherein, the Hon’ble High Court held as under:- “3. The Tribunal in the impugned judgment rejecting the contentions, placed reliance on the decision of Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd vs. CIT, (2015) 281 CTR (Del) 447: (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) in which it was held that when the assessee had not earned any income which was exempt from tax, the disallowance of the expenditure under s. 14A of the Act r.w.r. 8D of the Rules, would not arise. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused documents on record. We notice that in cheminvest Ltd (supra) Delhi High Court had re…

Vandana Rolling Mills Ltd, Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

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

ITA 72/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.72/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vandana Rolling Mills Ltd. Vandana Building, M.G. Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaacv7614A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CA
Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…ce of any exempt income is supported 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 that 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, as submitted by the Ld. AR and, rightly so, 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 r/w. the aforesaid settled position of law, w…

Vandana Ispat Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

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

ITA 71/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.71/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Vandana Ispat Private Limited Vandana Building, M.G. Road, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aabcv1344A .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CA
Section 142Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…ce of any exempt income is supported 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 that 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, as submitted by the Ld. AR and, rightly so, 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 r/w. the aforesaid settled position of law, w…

Shivali Udyog (I) Pvt. Ltd., Raipur vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Raipur-1, Raipur

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

ITA 70/RPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur29 May 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.70/Rpr/2022 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2017-18 Shivali Udyog (I) Private Limited Plot No.324, Sector-D, Urla Industrial Area, Raipur (C.G.)-492 001 Pan : Aaacd8194P .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Raipur-1 ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri S.K Meena, CIT-DR
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 5

…ce of any exempt income is supported 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 that 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, as submitted by the Ld. AR and, rightly so, 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 r/w. the aforesaid settled position of law, w…

ACIT, Chennai vs. Tamil Nadu Newsprint & Papers Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 940/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT &
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

…Rs.4,57,368/- and the CIT(A) enhanced the disallowance to the extent of exempt income i.e., dividend income earned by assessee i.e., Rs.18,28,080/-. The issue is now covered by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33, wherein it is held that disallowance u/s.14A r.w.rule 8D can be made to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee. The CIT(A) has simply followed the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court and for which he has not committed any infirmity, hence we affirm the order of CIT(A) and accordingly, this issue of assessee is dismissed. 14. The ass…

Tamilnadu Newsprint and Papers Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 896/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT &
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

…Rs.4,57,368/- and the CIT(A) enhanced the disallowance to the extent of exempt income i.e., dividend income earned by assessee i.e., Rs.18,28,080/-. The issue is now covered by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33, wherein it is held that disallowance u/s.14A r.w.rule 8D can be made to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee. The CIT(A) has simply followed the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court and for which he has not committed any infirmity, hence we affirm the order of CIT(A) and accordingly, this issue of assessee is dismissed. 14. The ass…

Tamilnadu Newsprint and Papers Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 895/CHNY/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 May 2023AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri Manjunatha.G

For Appellant: Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R. Mohan Reddy, CIT &
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)Section 32(1)(iia)

…Rs.4,57,368/- and the CIT(A) enhanced the disallowance to the extent of exempt income i.e., dividend income earned by assessee i.e., Rs.18,28,080/-. The issue is now covered by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33, wherein it is held that disallowance u/s.14A r.w.rule 8D can be made to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee. The CIT(A) has simply followed the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court and for which he has not committed any infirmity, hence we affirm the order of CIT(A) and accordingly, this issue of assessee is dismissed. 14. The ass…

Harshini Epc Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Hyderabad

ITA 399/HYD/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen Kumar
Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 199Section 36Section 36(1)(va)

…in the language of section 57(iii) to suggest that the purpose, for which the expenditure is made, should fructify into any benefit by way of return in the shape of income.” 14. Further, recently, the hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chem Investment (378 ITR 33) and also in the case of CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics reported in 80 taxmann.com 221 had also decided the issue in favour of the assessee. However, in the present case, the above said fact of assessee is not receiving any exempt income has not been considered by the Assessing Officer, therefore, we deem it appropriate to remand back this issue to t…

Harshini Epc Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. ITO Ward-2(3), Hyderabad

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

ITA 398/HYD/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad16 May 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Shri M. Naveen Kumar
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 40(1)(ia)Section 43B

…thing in the language of section 57(iii) to suggest that the purpose, for which the expenditure is made, should fructify into any benefit by way of return in the shape of income.” Further, recently, the hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chem Investment 378 ITR 33 and also in the case of CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics 80 taxmann.com 221 had also decided the issue in favour of the assessee. 15. With respect to the retrospective applicability of section 14A in the light of the amendment brought in the Act, Delhi High Court in the case of Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. 2022] 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi) had held…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. M/S Bharat Hotels Ltd

ITA - 272 / 2023HC Delhi12 May 2023
Section 14A

…g to Rs.3,24,69,741/- under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [in short, “Act”] given the fact that the respondent/assessee had not earned any exempt income. 9. This issue stands covered by the following decisions: (i) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT(2015) 378 ITR 33 (ii) CIT v. M/s Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras) (iii) Judgment dated 03.05.2023 passed in ITA 250/2023 titled Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 4 Delhi v. M/s Modern Info Technology Pvt. Ltd. 10. Insofar as Chettinad Logistics is concerned, which included one of us i.e., Rajiv Shakdher, J., the SLP…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. M/S Bharat Hotels Ltd

ITA - 266 / 2023HC Delhi09 May 2023
Section 14A

…short, “Act”] given the fact that the respondent/assessee has not earned any exempt income. 8.1 Mr Kumar cannot but accept, that the issue raised in the present appeal is covered inter alia by the following judgments: (i) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (ii) CIT v. M/s Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras) (iii) Judgment dated 03.05.2023 passed in ITA 250/2023 titled Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 4 Delhi v. M/s Modern Info Technology Pvt. Ltd. 9. Insofar as the Chettinad Logistics is concerned, which included one of us i.e., Rajiv Shakdher, J., the…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax (Central)-2 vs. M/S Bharat Hotels Ltd

ITA - 263 / 2023HC Delhi08 May 2023
Section 14A

…“Act”], read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 [in short, Rules] can be deleted, in a situation when the assessee had not availed of any exempt income? 9. This issue stands covered by the following decisions: (i) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (ii) CIT v. M/s Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras) (iii) Judgment dated 03.05.2023 passed in ITA 250/2023 titled Principal Commissioner of Income Tax – 4 Delhi v. M/s Modern Info Technology Pvt. Ltd. 10. Insofar as Chettinad Logistics is concerned, which included one of us i.e., Rajiv Shakdher, J., the SL…

Asstt. Commissioner of Income-Tax, Central Circle-1, Jaipur vs. M/S Manglam Build Developers Ltd, Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 373/JPR/2022[2013]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Apr 2023

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

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (C.A.)For Respondent: Shri James Kurian (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 133ASection 14A

…आयकरअपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुरन्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”A” JAIPUR MkWa- ,l-lhrky{eh] U;kf;dlnL; ,oa Jh jkBksMdeys'kt;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, AM vk;djvihy la-@ITA. No. 373/JPR/2022 fu/kZkj.ko"kZ@AssessmentYears : 2013-14 cuke The ACIT, M/s Manglam Build Developers Ltd. 6th Floor, Apex Mall, Tonk Road, Central Circle-1, Vs. Lal Kothi, Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;hys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AAFCM 4862 Q vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent jktLo dh vksj ls@Revenue by : Shri James Kurian (CIT) fu/kZkfjrh…

M/S. Nsl Sugars Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-5(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 120/BANG/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Sri.T.Gandhi, CAFor Respondent: Ms.Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 154Section 250

…t of any exempt income, no disallowance u/s 14A of the I.T.Act is warranted. In this context, we rely on the following judicial pronouncements:- (i) Pr.CIT v. IL and FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. (2017) 399 ITR 483 (Delhi) (ii) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) (iii) Redington (India) Ltd. v. Addl.CIT (2017) 392 ITR 633 (Mad.) (iv) Pr.CIT v. Novell Software Development (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 434 ITR 154 (Karn.) 8. It is to be mentioned that Finance Act, 2022 had amended section 14A of the I.T.Act, whereby it is stated that irrespective whether the assessee is not in receipt of exempt income, d…

M/S. Computer Science Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle 2(1), Indore

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 319/IND/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…’ble Apex Court in the case of PCIT vs. Oil Industry Development Board, 262 Taxman 102 and PCIT vs. Chettinad Logistics Private Limited, 257 Taxman 2. The Ld. AR also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33 and PCIT vs.IL & FS, 399 ITR 483. 23. The Ld. DR submitted that for earning investment of Rs.18,65,61,000/- the assessee has suo moto disallowed such amount of Rs.20,37,506/-. In fact, the current investments were Rs.14,11,59,91,000/- and for such exorbitant investment the assesses has not invoked the disallowance under 14A read with Rule 8D. Ther…