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 367,368 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

Bcl Securities Pvt Ltd, Gurgaon vs. ACIT Circle-4(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1615/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Oct 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri S.K. Tulsiyan, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Rinku Singh, Sr.DR
Section 14ASection 28Section 36Section 37

…essing Officer has proceeded to make disallowance of Rs.1,87,024/- once since exempt income itself is Rs.6,525/-, the disallowance u/s.14A cannot exceed more than exempt income as held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT, (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) which has also been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of GVK Project Ltd. in ITA No.646/2018. Thus, the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer is restricted to Rs.6,525/- and balance is deleted. 78. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. Above decision was announced on conclusion of Virtual Hearing in th…

ACIT, Circle-16(1), New Delhi vs. Mccann Erickson India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by the ld

ITA 3528/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjesh Kumar JawaraniFor Respondent: Ms.Paramita M. Biswas
Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 40Section 41Section 41(1)

…nce under Section 14A of the Act. The fact shows that assessee has not received any exempt income during the year. Therefore, the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Limited Vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 holding that disallowance under Section 14A of the Act could not be made if no exempt income has been received. The ld. CIT (Appeals) has deleted the disallowance following the above judicial precedents, which cannot be found fault with. Accordingly ground Nos. 9–11 of the appeal are dismissed. 14. In the result appeal filed by the ld. Assessing O…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(2), Hyderabad vs. Telangana State Power Generation Corporation Limited, Hyderabad

Appeal is dismissed in above terms

ITA 1602/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad05 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri M.Chandramouleswara Rao, ARFor Respondent: Shri Y.V.S.T.Sai, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…disallowance may be upheld. In this connection, he relied on the following case law: i. CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., [80 taxmann.com 221] (Madras); ii. CIT Vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd., [223 Taxman 130] (Guj); iii. Cheminvest Ltd., Vs. CIT (2015) [378 ITR 33] (Del) Their lordships hold that Section 14A read with Rule 8D applies only in relation to an assessee’s exempt income and not otherwise. It is an admitted fact that the assessee has not derived any exempt income in the relevant previous year. We therefore sustain the order of CIT(A) under challenge for this precise reason alone. 4. This Revenue’…

Abhilash Growth Fund Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2957/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B. R. R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) Abhilash Growth Fund Pvt. Vs DCIT Ltd. 105, Ashoka Estate, 24, Circl-1(1) Barakhamba Road, New Delhi New Delhi AAACA2461H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Anoop Sharma, Adv Respondent by Sh. Virender Singh, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 28.09.2021 Date of Pronouncement 05.10.2021 ORDER PER SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JM This appeals is filed by the assessee against the order dated 26/02/2018 passed by CIT(A)-1, New Delhi for Assessmen…

ACIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi vs. National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 3698/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 145Section 14ASection 32Section 37(1)Section 40

…o exempt income earned during the year. The fact that no exempt income was earned is evident from Page 21 Para 7.2 of the Assessment Order. The CIT(A) deleted the addition relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi HC in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT 378 ITR 33. The above view is now being affirmed by Hon’ble Apex court in the case of PCIT V. Oil industries Development Board, [2019] 103 taxmann.com 326 (SC) where in the SLP filed by the Department was dismissed. 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that during the year the assessee has…

ACIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi vs. National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 3697/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 145Section 14ASection 32Section 37(1)Section 40

…o exempt income earned during the year. The fact that no exempt income was earned is evident from Page 21 Para 7.2 of the Assessment Order. The CIT(A) deleted the addition relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi HC in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT 378 ITR 33. The above view is now being affirmed by Hon’ble Apex court in the case of PCIT V. Oil industries Development Board, [2019] 103 taxmann.com 326 (SC) where in the SLP filed by the Department was dismissed. 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that during the year the assessee has…

National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 3438/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 145Section 14ASection 32Section 37(1)Section 40

…o exempt income earned during the year. The fact that no exempt income was earned is evident from Page 21 Para 7.2 of the Assessment Order. The CIT(A) deleted the addition relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi HC in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT 378 ITR 33. The above view is now being affirmed by Hon’ble Apex court in the case of PCIT V. Oil industries Development Board, [2019] 103 taxmann.com 326 (SC) where in the SLP filed by the Department was dismissed. 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that during the year the assessee has…

National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi

Appeal are dismissed

ITA 3437/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Sh. Prashant Maharishi

Section 145Section 14ASection 32Section 37(1)Section 40

…o exempt income earned during the year. The fact that no exempt income was earned is evident from Page 21 Para 7.2 of the Assessment Order. The CIT(A) deleted the addition relying upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi HC in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT 378 ITR 33. The above view is now being affirmed by Hon’ble Apex court in the case of PCIT V. Oil industries Development Board, [2019] 103 taxmann.com 326 (SC) where in the SLP filed by the Department was dismissed. 22. We have heard both the parties and perused the material available on record. It is pertinent to note that during the year the assessee has…

DCIT, Circle-11(1), New Delhi vs. Hero Corporate Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the Department stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4341/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2021AY 2011-12
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’: NEW DELHI (Through Video Conferencing) BEFORE, SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Dy. CIT, M/s Hero Corporate Circle-11(1), Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Vs. E-1, Qutab Hotel Complex, Shaheed Jeet Singh Marg, New Delhi-110 016. PAN –AAACH 1277P (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Ms. Anima, Sr. DR Respondent by None Date of Hearing 14.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement 30.09.2021 ORDER PER SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JM: This appeal is preferred by the Revenue against order dated 06.03.2017 passed by the…

DCIT, Circle- 10(2), New Delhi vs. Crescent Epc Projects and Technical Services Ltd. (Earlier Known As Gvk Projects and Technical Services Ltd.), Secunderabad

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 399/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Sept 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Ms. Chandani Shah, CAFor Respondent: Dr. Maninder Kaur, Sr.D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

…ned any exempt income during the year under consideration, and therefore, there was no question of making any disallowance u/s.14A. This proposition is squarely covered by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT, (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) which has also been followed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of GVK Project Ltd. in ITA No.646/2018. Thus, the order of the CIT (A) deleting the disallowance is 4 I.T.A. No.399/DEL/2019 upheld and the grounds raised by the Revenue on this score from 1 to 5 are dismissed. 6. Now coming to the issue of disallowance of payment mad…

M/S Namdhari Seeds Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-5(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result appeals filed by assessee for assessment years under consideration stands partly allowed

ITA 830/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore23 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Appellant: Smt. Suman Lunkar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Pradeep Kumar, CIT (DR)
Section 10(1)Section 14ASection 234BSection 234D

…refore of the view that this disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D shall not exceed exempt income earned for the year. This principle is supported by the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33, where it was clearly held that disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A shall not exceed exempt income earned for the year. Respectfully following the same we direct the Ld. AO to restrict the disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D to the extent of dividend income earned by assessee during the year under consideration. Accordingly, this issu…

Pawan Kumar Bansil, Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 62(1), New Delhi

In the result, this appeal by Assessee is allowed

ITA 5261/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Avikal Manu, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hich it has been held that where the assessee has not made any claim for exemption no disallowance can be made u/s 14A of the Income Tax Act. The various judicial ruling which support the contention of the assessee is given below:- i. Cheminvest Ltd vs. ACIT 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) ii. CIT vs Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 486 and 299/ 2014 (Delhi High Court) iii. Commissioner of Income Tax vs Corrtech Energy Pvt Ltd 2015 372 ITR 98 (Guj) iv. CIT vs Shivam Motors Pvt Ltd ITA No 88/2014 v. CIT vs Corretch Energy Pvt. Ltd. ITA No. 239/2014 In view of the above disallowance of Rs. 26,61,443/- made u/s 14A of the Income…

DCIT, Circle- 27(1), New Delhi vs. Usha International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3318/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Prashant Maharishiasstt. Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri V.P. Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36

…n appeals for AYs 2011-12 and 2012-13 and following the judgments of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the cases of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.), CIT v. Holcim India P. Ltd., (2014) 272 CTR (Del.) 282 and Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del.) the disallowance under section 14A read with Rule 8D of Income Tax Rules is restricted to Rs. 7,12,047/- i.e. the amount of dividend income. Since the assessee company has already made disallowance of Rs. 3,44,109/-. Further disallowance on this basis is to be made of Rs. 3,67,938/- as against disallowance of Rs, 62,65,891/- made by the Ass…

ACIT, Circle- 17(1), New Delhi vs. Mlv Credits Holding & Leasing Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6668/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K.Panda & Shri Kul Bharatassessment Year : 2013-14 Acit, Vs M/S Modern Mvl Credits Circle-17(1), Holding & Leasing Ltd. New Delhi F-79,/18, Sainik Farm, New Delhi-110062 Pan-Aaacm9072H Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…In support of this contention, the learned counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court rendered in the case of CIT vs Rajendra Prasad Moody and judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs CIT 378 ITR 33(SC). 8. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the records material available on record and gone through the order of the authorities below. The Ld. CIT(A) has decided the issue by observing as under:- 4 | P a g e “6. I have considered the facts of the case, basis of disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and submissions of appellant.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jaypee Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.3559/Del

ITA 3559/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: And Shri Ashish Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bhuvnesh Kulshreshtha
Section 132Section 153A

…venue should be dismissed. 12.1. In his alternative contention, he submitted that the assessee has earned tax free exempt income of Rs.60,718/- and, therefore, in view of Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., reported in [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del.), the disallowance under section 14A cannot exceed the actual amount of tax free exempt income received. 85 ITA.No.3558 & 3559/Del./2016 M/s. Jaypee Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi. 13. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the A.O. 14. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orde…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jaypee Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.3559/Del

ITA 3558/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava

For Appellant: And Shri Ashish Goel, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Bhuvnesh Kulshreshtha
Section 132Section 153A

…venue should be dismissed. 12.1. In his alternative contention, he submitted that the assessee has earned tax free exempt income of Rs.60,718/- and, therefore, in view of Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., reported in [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del.), the disallowance under section 14A cannot exceed the actual amount of tax free exempt income received. 85 ITA.No.3558 & 3559/Del./2016 M/s. Jaypee Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi. 13. The Ld. D.R. on the other hand heavily relied on the order of the A.O. 14. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orde…

ACIT 14(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Maharashtra State Power Generation Company Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1394/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rajesh Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Acit-14(2)(1), M/S Maharashtra State Power Room No. 432, 4Th Floor Vs. Generation Company Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, Plot No. G-9, Prakashgad, 2Nd Mumbai – 400 020 Floor, Anant Kanekar Marg, Station Road, Bandra (East), Mumbai – 400 051 Pan No. Aaecm2935R (Revenue) (Assessee) Assessee By : Shri Ketan Ved, A.R Revenue By : Shri Rahul Raman, D.R Date Of Hearing : 28/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/09/2021

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rahul Raman, D.R
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)(ii)Section 145Section 14ASection 201(1)Section 40Section 40(1)(ia)

…JSW, 116 taxmann.com 565 v. Inox Leisure Ltd vs. DCIT, ITA No. 3475/Ahd/2016 (Ahd) vi. CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics (P) Ltd. reported in [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad HC) – [SLP dismissed in [2018] 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC)]. vii. Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del HC) – [SLP dismissed by Hon‟ble Supreme Court]. viii. PCIT Vs. Oil Industries Development Board (2019) 262 Taxman 102 (SC) ix. CIT Vs. Celebrity Fashion Ltd. (Tax case Appeal No. 26 of 2018) (Mad HC) x. PCIT vs. Caraf Builders and Constructions Pvt. Ltd. (2019) 414 ITR 122/ 261 Taxman 47 (Delhi) (HC) xi. PCIT vs. Ballapur Industries Ltd. (ITA…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. East Coast Imports & Exports, Kakinada

In the result, appeal of the revenue as well as the cross objections of the assessee are dismissed

ITA 79/VIZ/2021[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam17 Sept 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K.Choudhry, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.79/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-13) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S East Coast Imports & Circle-1 Exports Kakinada D.No.67-15-32, Office No.1 Nagamallithota Junction Kakinada [Pan : Aacfe2078A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) Cross Objection No.49/Viz/2021 (Arising Out Of I.T.A. No.79/Viz/2021) M/S East Coast Imports & Exports Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax D.No.67-15-32, Office No.1 Circle-1 Nagamallithota Junction Kakinada Kakinada [Pan : Aacfe2078A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) रधजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.Srinivasa Rao, Dr निर्धाऩरती की ओरसे / Assessee By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar सुिवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 08.09.2021 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 17.09.2021 आदेश /O R D E R Per Bench : This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) [Cit(A)]-2, Visakhapatnam In Ita

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri V.Srinivasa Rao, DR

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM (through web-based video conferencing platform) श्री एन के चौिरी,न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री धड.एस .सुन्दर धसंह, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI N.K.CHOUDHRY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.79/Viz/2021 (निर्धारण वर्ा/Assessment Year:2012-13) Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s East Coast Imports & Circle-1 Exports Kakinada D.No.67-15-32, Office No.1 Nagamallithota Junction Kakinada [PAN : AACFE2078A] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्य…

Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes therefore

ITA 1656/HYD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri M. Chandramouleswara RaoFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…mitted in light of the assessee’s annual report for the impugned assessment year that the assessee has not declared any exempt income which could trigger application of Sec.14A r.w. Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules in light of case law Chemnivest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del), CIT Vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. 223 Taxmann.com 130 (Guj) and CIT Vs. CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Limited (2017) 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras). The Revenue’s stand on the other hand is that this clinching aspect has nowhere been seen raised or considered either in assessment or in the CIT(A)’s order. 3. Faced with this situation, we d…

DCIT, Circle-1(1), Hyderabad vs. Andhra Pradesh Power Generation Corporation Limited, Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes therefore

ITA 1608/HYD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad17 Sept 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Sri M. Chandramouleswara RaoFor Respondent: Sri Y.V.S.T. Sai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…mitted in light of the assessee’s annual report for the impugned assessment year that the assessee has not declared any exempt income which could trigger application of Sec.14A r.w. Rule 8D of the I.T. Rules in light of case law Chemnivest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del), CIT Vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. 223 Taxmann.com 130 (Guj) and CIT Vs. CIT Vs. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Limited (2017) 80 taxmann.com 221 (Madras). The Revenue’s stand on the other hand is that this clinching aspect has nowhere been seen raised or considered either in assessment or in the CIT(A)’s order. 3. Faced with this situation, we d…