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 367,514 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

DCIT, CC-2(1), Chennai vs. M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2704/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

…which held that in the absence of any exempt income disallowance U/s.14A of the Act of any amount was not permissible. The Hon’ble Supreme Court while arriving at a conclusion has followed its earlier decision in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33, where a similar view has been expressed by the court. In this case, the assessee has filed all evidences to prove the fact that no exempt income is earned for the year. The assessee has also filed all evidences to prove that its own fund being share capital and reserves and surplus is over and above amount of investments. Under these facts, no di…

DCIT, CC-2(1), Chennai vs. M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2703/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

…which held that in the absence of any exempt income disallowance U/s.14A of the Act of any amount was not permissible. The Hon’ble Supreme Court while arriving at a conclusion has followed its earlier decision in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33, where a similar view has been expressed by the court. In this case, the assessee has filed all evidences to prove the fact that no exempt income is earned for the year. The assessee has also filed all evidences to prove that its own fund being share capital and reserves and surplus is over and above amount of investments. Under these facts, no di…

Snj Distillers Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Central Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2195/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

…which held that in the absence of any exempt income disallowance U/s.14A of the Act of any amount was not permissible. The Hon’ble Supreme Court while arriving at a conclusion has followed its earlier decision in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33, where a similar view has been expressed by the court. In this case, the assessee has filed all evidences to prove the fact that no exempt income is earned for the year. The assessee has also filed all evidences to prove that its own fund being share capital and reserves and surplus is over and above amount of investments. Under these facts, no di…

Snj Distillers Pvt Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Central Circle-2(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2194/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

…which held that in the absence of any exempt income disallowance U/s.14A of the Act of any amount was not permissible. The Hon’ble Supreme Court while arriving at a conclusion has followed its earlier decision in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33, where a similar view has been expressed by the court. In this case, the assessee has filed all evidences to prove the fact that no exempt income is earned for the year. The assessee has also filed all evidences to prove that its own fund being share capital and reserves and surplus is over and above amount of investments. Under these facts, no di…

DCIT, CC-2(1), Chennai vs. M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeals filed by the Revenue for Asst

ITA 2705/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai04 Nov 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2703, 2704, 2705/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2014-15,2015-16 & 2016-17) The Dcit, Vs M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Central Circle 2(1), Old No.47, New No.99, Chennai – 600 034. Canal Bank Road, Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.Nos.2194, 2195 & 2993/Chny/2019, ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2015-16, 2016-17 & 2017-18) Vs The Acit, M/S. Snj Distillers Pvt. Ltd. Old No.47, New No.99, Central Circle 2(1), Canal Bank Road, Chennai – 600 034. Cit Nagar, Nandanam, Chenani – 600 035. Pan: Aalcs9312F (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) "नधा"रतीक" ओर से/Assessee By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate : राज"कीओरसे /Revenue By Shri Ar.V. Sreenivasan, Addl.Cit : सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13.10.2020 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 04.11.2020

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, Advocate
Section 132Section 139Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 234A

…which held that in the absence of any exempt income disallowance U/s.14A of the Act of any amount was not permissible. The Hon’ble Supreme Court while arriving at a conclusion has followed its earlier decision in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33, where a similar view has been expressed by the court. In this case, the assessee has filed all evidences to prove the fact that no exempt income is earned for the year. The assessee has also filed all evidences to prove that its own fund being share capital and reserves and surplus is over and above amount of investments. Under these facts, no di…

ACIT, Circle- 11(2), New Delhi vs. Him Urja Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 7843/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES “C” : DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI O.P. KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA.No.7843/Del./2017 Assessment Year 2013-2014 M/s. Him Urja Pvt. Ltd., The ACIT, Circle-11(2), S-321, Panchsheel Park, [vs. New Delhi – 110 017. New Delhi PAN AAACH7036E (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Shri Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR For Assessee : Shri Gautam Jain, Advocate Date of Hearing : 03.11.2020 Date of Pronouncement : 03.11.2020 ORDER PER BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by Revenue has been directed against the Order of the Ld. CIT(A)-35, New Delhi,…

M/S. Tech Steel Products Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 685/BANG/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Oct 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2011 – 12 M/S Tech Steel Products Limited, No. 671, Nagawara Main Road, Jcit (Osd), O/O The Cit Arabic College Post, Vs. Bangalore – Iii, Bengaluru Bengaluru – 560077 Pan : Aabct0362L Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shree G. S. Prashanth, C. A. Revenue By : Shree Priyadarshini Mishra, Jcit Dr Date Of Hearing : 29.10.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 29.10.2020 O R D E R Per Arun Kumar Garodia, A. M.: This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee & The Same Is Directed Against The Order Of Cit (A) 7, Bengaluru Dated 16.12.2016. 2. In This Appeal, The Assessee Has Raised Four Grounds But The Grievances Are Two Only. The First Grievance Is About Disallowance U/S 14A Even In The Absence Of Exempt Income. The Second Grievance Is About Disallowance Of Rs. 31,72,078/- Clamed By The Assessee As Repairs Of Machinery. Regarding The First Issue, He Submitted That Schedule – 9 Of The Audited Accounts Is Available On Page 93 Of The Paper Book & From The Same, It Can Be Seen That The Page 2 Of 4

For Appellant: Shree G. S. Prashanth, C. AFor Respondent: Shree Priyadarshini Mishra, JCIT DR
Section 14A

…al order cited by the learned AR of the assessee, it is noted by the tribunal that there is no exempt income in the relevant year and the tribunal followed the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Chemiinvest Ltd.vs. ITO as reported in 378 ITR 33 and decided the issue in favour of the assessee. In the present case also, we have seen that there is no exempt income in the present year and therefore, we follow this tribunal order and in turn follow the the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Chemiinvest Ltd.vs. ITO (Supra) and decide this issue in favour of the assess…

ACIT, Central Circle- 20, New Delhi vs. Ambience Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 7185/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. Ambience Pvt. Ltd, Central Circle-20, L-4, Green Park Extn, New New Delhi Delhi Pan: Aaaca0541K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar Gupta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…8D(2)(iii) of the Act. Assessment was made at Rs. 539240743/-. 4. On appeal, the LD CIT (A) noted that assessee does not have any exempt income and therefore, he deleted the disallowance following decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd vs. CIT 378 ITR 33. 5. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that where there is no exempt income claimed by the assessee there cannot be any disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. 6. The ld DR could not show that the assessee has claimed any exempt income for its computation of total income. Against this ld AR has shown us the computation of total income of the assessee…

Sach Electro Mech Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Surat

In the result ground No. 4 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 262/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Court - Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.262/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sach Electro Mech Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, C/2, Maheshwari Apartment, S Ward-2(1)(2), Surat. Timaliyawad, Nanpura, . Surat – 395 001. [Pan: Aaics 8963 M] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Manish J.Shah – Ar राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…On the other hand, the ld. DR relied upon the order of the Lower Authorities. 16. We have heard both the submissions and gone through the order of the lower authorities. The A.O. 17. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [[2015] reported viz; 378 ITR 33/234 Taxman 761/61 taxmann.com 118 (Delhi)], Hon'ble Delhi High Court has, on this issue, observed as follows: “ 15. Turning to the central question that arises for consideration, the Court finds that the complete answer is provided by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Holcim India (P.) Ltd. [2015] 57 taxmann.com 28. In that case a similar ques…

Erp Infrastructurees Projects Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT 12(2)-1, Mumbai

In the result this appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as above

ITA 3146/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahyaassessment Year: 2014-15. Erp Infrastructure Projects Pvt. Ltd., Dcit 12(2)-1 30 203, Neptune Chsl Phase-2, Vs. Mumbai Sector-3, Emp Thakur Villa, Kandivali (E), Mumbai 400101

For Appellant: Shri Nimesh ChothaniFor Respondent: Ram Tiwari
Section 14Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)Section 37Section 37(1)

…income on the touchstone of Hon’ble High Court decision in case of Delight Enterprises ITA No. 110 of 2009 dated 26.02.2009 in which the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has followed the Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of Chem Investment vs CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) 9. Ld. Counsel of the assessee fairly agreed to the above proposition. 10. As regards ground no.2, Ld. Counsel of the assessee submitted that he shall not be pressing the same. 11. Accordingly ground no.2 is dismissed as not pressed. 12. In the result this appeal by the assessee is partly allowed as above. Order pronounced under rule 34(4) o…

Mirah Hospitality & Food Solutions P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 2(1), Mumbai

ITA 4693/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: The Itat In These Cases Against A Common Order Of Learned Cit(A) For A.Y. 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2010-11 Dated 28.5.2018. 2. Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is Engaged In The Business Of “Hotels & Resorts”, Filed The Return Of Income For The Ay 2009-2010 Declaring The Total Loss Of Rs.43,15,534/- After Set Off Of Ltcg Of Rs. 1,31,36,082/-. Assessee Is A Group Concern Of M/S. Twinkle Group. There Was A Search & Seizure Action On The Said M/S. Twinkle Group U/S 132 Of The Act. Accordingly, In Response To The Notice U/S 153A Of The Act, Assessee Filed The Return Of Income Declaring The Same Total Loss (Rs. (-) 43,15,334/-). Ao Completed The Assessment U/S 143(3) R.W.S 153A Of The Act Determining The Total Loss Of Rs. 3,82,977/- Which Include Certain Disallowances & Rs. 27,68,422/- Is One

Section 115JSection 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…t this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Delight Enterprises (ITA no. 110 of 2009), where Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court has agreed the decision of in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (378 ITR 33). The case laws referred by learned Counsel of the assessee in his submission are also germane. 5 Mirah Hospitality & Food Solutions Pvt. Ltd. 14. Another proposition learned counsel canvassed that for the purpose of disallowance u/s. 14A under Rule 8D(3) only those investment should be considered which have yield exempt income. We find that tho…

Covalent Laboratories Pvt Ltd., Hyd, Hyderabad vs. DCIT, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad

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

ITA 863/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P. Madhavi Devi & D.S. Sunder Singh(Through Video Conference) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Vs. Covalent Laboratories Pvt. Tax, Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Ltd., Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 46A

…in the impugned AY, the assessee did not earn any exempt income. When the assessee has not earned any exempt income and there can be no disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del.) has held that section 14A will not apply where no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant assessment year. Similar view is taken by this Tribunal in the case of Prathista Industries Ltd., Secunderabad in ITA No. 1302/hyd/2015 7 ITA.Nos. 1022 & 863/Hyd/2017 Covalent Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Hyd.. dated 29/04/2016. Respect…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(2), Hyderabad vs. Covalent Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad

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

ITA 1022/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad11 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri P. Madhavi Devi & D.S. Sunder Singh(Through Video Conference) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Vs. Covalent Laboratories Pvt. Tax, Circle – 1(2), Hyderabad. Ltd., Hyderabad.

For Appellant: Shri S. Rama RaoFor Respondent: Shri YVST Sai
Section 133(6)Section 133ASection 46A

…in the impugned AY, the assessee did not earn any exempt income. When the assessee has not earned any exempt income and there can be no disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del.) has held that section 14A will not apply where no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant assessment year. Similar view is taken by this Tribunal in the case of Prathista Industries Ltd., Secunderabad in ITA No. 1302/hyd/2015 7 ITA.Nos. 1022 & 863/Hyd/2017 Covalent Laboratories Pvt. Ltd., Hyd.. dated 29/04/2016. Respect…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2652/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…whereas the Assessing Officer has made disallowance amounting to Rs. 10,58,926/-. It is trite law that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the amount of exempt income earned. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: a. Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del. HC) b. Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC) 9. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee earned dividend income of Rs. 2,86,370/- during the year and no expenditure pertaining to earning of such exempt income has been disclosed by the assessee in his accounts. The Assessing Officer after considering all the relevant aspects o…

M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2429/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…whereas the Assessing Officer has made disallowance amounting to Rs. 10,58,926/-. It is trite law that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the amount of exempt income earned. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: a. Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del. HC) b. Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC) 9. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee earned dividend income of Rs. 2,86,370/- during the year and no expenditure pertaining to earning of such exempt income has been disclosed by the assessee in his accounts. The Assessing Officer after considering all the relevant aspects o…

M/S. Sindhu Trade Links Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

The appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2428/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Sept 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamblesindhu Trade Links Ltd. Vs Addl. Cit(A) 129, Transport Centre, New Range-8 Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Dcit Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Central Circle-21 129, Transport Centre, New New Delhi Rohtak Road (Appellant) Punjabi Bagh New Delhi Aaacs0447A (Respondent) Vs Sindhu Trade Links Ltd. Dcit 129, Transport Centre, New Circle-8(1) Rohtak Road New Delhi Punjabi Bagh New Delhi (Respondent) Aaacs0447A (Appellant) Appellant By Sh. Salil Kapoor, Adv Respondent By Sh. Saras Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 16.07.2020 Date Of Pronouncement 11.09.2020 Orders Dated 21/2/2014 For Assessment Year 2008-09 & 2009-10 Respectively Passed By Cit(A)’S-Xi, New Delhi.

Section 14ASection 2(22)Section 69

…whereas the Assessing Officer has made disallowance amounting to Rs. 10,58,926/-. It is trite law that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the amount of exempt income earned. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: a. Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del. HC) b. Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC) 9. The Ld. DR submitted that the assessee earned dividend income of Rs. 2,86,370/- during the year and no expenditure pertaining to earning of such exempt income has been disclosed by the assessee in his accounts. The Assessing Officer after considering all the relevant aspects o…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Hyderabad vs. Ilabs Hyderabad Technology Centre Private Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 891/HYD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhassessment Year: 2013-14 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Vs. Ilabs Hyderabad Tax, Circle – 2(1), Hyderabad Technology Centre Pvt. Ltd., Hyderabad. Pan – Aabci 1166K (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Abhaya Rout Assessee By: None Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 10/09/2020 Order Per D.S. Sunder Singh, A.M. This Is Revenue’S Appeal For The A.Y 2014-15 Against The Order Of The Cit (A) - 2, Hyderabad, Dated 28.03.2019. All The Grounds Raised By The Revenue In This Appeal Are Related To The Disallowance Made By The Ao U/S 14A R.W. Rule 8D Of The I.T. Rules, Which Was Deleted By The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Abhaya Rout
Section 14A

…of the total income alone can be disallowed. In the case before us, when the assessee has not earned any exempt income, there can be no disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del.) has held that section 14A will not apply where no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant assessment year .. " Respectfully following the above decisions of Hon'ble ITAT in the said cases, we hold that since the appellant has not earned any exempt income during the relevant assessment year, the provisions of section 14A…

Serene Estates Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1860/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad10 Sept 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri D.S. Sunder Singhassessment Year: 2013-14 Serene Estates Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Hyderabad. Income-Tax, Circle – 3(1), Hyderabad Pan – Aajcs 5462 Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Sri A.V. Raghuram Revenue By: D.J. Prabhakar Anand Date Of Hearing: 09/09/2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 10/09/2020 Order Per D.S. Sunder Singh, A.M. This Is Assessee’S Appeal For The A.Y 2013-14 Against The Order Of The Cit (A) - 3, Hyderabad, Dated 18.08.2017. All The Grounds Raised By The Assessee In This Appeal Are Related To The Disallowance Made By The Ao U/S 14A R.W. Rule 8D Of The I.T. Rules, Which Was Sustained By The Ld. Cit(A).

For Appellant: Sri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: D.J. Prabhakar Anand
Section 14A

…of the total income alone can be disallowed. In the case before us, when the assessee has not earned any exempt income, there can be no disallowance under section 14A of the Act. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del.) has held that section 14A will not apply where no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant assessment year .. " Respectfully following the above decision of Hon'ble ITAT in the case of Prathista Industries and since the appellant has not earned any dividend during the relevant assessment year; the provisions of section 14…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Sky Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the Asst

ITA 3972/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3214/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3215/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Tata Sky Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of Unit 301, To 305, 3 Rd Floor, Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Windsor, Off C.S.T. Road, [Now Assistant Vs. Kalina, Santacruz (East), Commissioner Of Income – Mumbai-400 098 Tax, Range 16(1)] Mumbai .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aagcs9294M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3971/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3972/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Tata Sky Ltd. Income Tax 7(3) 34D Floor, C-1, Wadia 6Th Room No. 615, Floor, International Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, (Bombay Dyeing), Mumbai-400 020 Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbi-400 025 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J D Mistry, Senior Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29-07-2020 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-09-2020

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy
Section 143(3)Section 40

…4 Tata Sky Limited; AYs 09-10 & 10-11 has debited huge interest expenses and other administrative expenses, but failed to disallow expenses relatable to exempt income, by following the decision of ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case of Champ Investment Ltd. (378 ITR 33). It is the case of the assessee that during the year under consideration it has not earned any exempt income and hence, the question of disallowance of expenses u/s 14A of the Act does not arise. 23. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that this is…

DCIT 7(3), Mumbai vs. Tata Sky Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for the Asst

ITA 3971/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Sept 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3214/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3215/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) Tata Sky Limited The Asst. Commissioner Of Unit 301, To 305, 3 Rd Floor, Income Tax, Circle 7(3), Windsor, Off C.S.T. Road, [Now Assistant Vs. Kalina, Santacruz (East), Commissioner Of Income – Mumbai-400 098 Tax, Range 16(1)] Mumbai .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aagcs9294M Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3971/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2009-10) Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3972/Mum/2014 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2010-11) The Dy. Commissioner Of M/S Tata Sky Ltd. Income Tax 7(3) 34D Floor, C-1, Wadia 6Th Room No. 615, Floor, International Centre, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, (Bombay Dyeing), Mumbai-400 020 Pandurang Budhkar Marg, Worli, Mumbi-400 025 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर े / Appellant By : Shri J D Mistry, Senior Advocate प्रत्यथी की ओर े / Respondent By : Shri R Manjunatha Swamy, Cit-Dr ुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 29-07-2020 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 10-09-2020

For Appellant: Shri J D Mistry, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R Manjunatha Swamy
Section 143(3)Section 40

…4 Tata Sky Limited; AYs 09-10 & 10-11 has debited huge interest expenses and other administrative expenses, but failed to disallow expenses relatable to exempt income, by following the decision of ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case of Champ Investment Ltd. (378 ITR 33). It is the case of the assessee that during the year under consideration it has not earned any exempt income and hence, the question of disallowance of expenses u/s 14A of the Act does not arise. 23. We have heard both the parties, perused the material available on record and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We find that this is…