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

Laxmi Civil Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commisisoner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1178/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…nce as per Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules at Rs.2,87,333/- consisting of disallowance of interest of Rs.2,42,333/- and of disallowance of expenses of Rs.45,000/-. This decision is reversed by Hon. Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) HC and also SLP filed by the Department against the said decision is dismissed by Hon. Supreme Court. (Refer Page No. 347, Para 23 for the decision and refer Page No. 335 – 349 for the case laws in the Paperbook for the Case Laws) 5. The above disallowance was challenged before the CIT (A) who has discussed this issue on page No. 65 of his…

Laxmi Civil Engineering Services Pvt. Ltd., Kolhapur vs. Assistant Commisisoner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1177/PUN/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Jun 2020AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm Sl.

For Appellant: Shri Dr. P. Daniel, AdvFor Respondent: Shri B. Kishore
Section 132Section 132(4)Section 143(3)

…nce as per Rule 8D of the Income-tax Rules at Rs.2,87,333/- consisting of disallowance of interest of Rs.2,42,333/- and of disallowance of expenses of Rs.45,000/-. This decision is reversed by Hon. Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) HC and also SLP filed by the Department against the said decision is dismissed by Hon. Supreme Court. (Refer Page No. 347, Para 23 for the decision and refer Page No. 335 – 349 for the case laws in the Paperbook for the Case Laws) 5. The above disallowance was challenged before the CIT (A) who has discussed this issue on page No. 65 of his…

DCIT 16(1), Mumbai vs. Siti Cable Network Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 3760/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh, Vp & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am (Hearing Through Video Conferencing Mode) आयकर अपील सं./ I.T.A. No.3760/Mum/2018 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) Dcit-16(1) M/S. Siti Cable Network Ltd. बनाम/ Room No.439 135, Continental Building Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Marg Dr. Annie Besant Road Vs. Mumbai-400 020. Worli, Mumbai-400 018. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacw-6349-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & C.O. No.157/Mum/2019 (Arising Out Of Ita No. 3760/Mum/2018) (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/S. Siti Cable Network Ltd. Dcit-16(1) बनाम/ 135, Continental Building Room No.439 Dr. Annie Besant Road Aaykar Bhavan, M.K. Marg Vs. Worli, Mumbai-400 018. Mumbai-400 020. "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacw-6349-M (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : Assessee By : Shri Jay Bhansali -Ld. Ar Revenue By : Shri V. Vinod Kumar -Ld. Dr सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 25/06/2020 Date Of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 25/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement

For Appellant: Shri Jay Bhansali -Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri V. Vinod Kumar -Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 14ASection 57

…nce could be made u/s 14A in terms of following binding judicial precedents: - 1. Pr.CIT vs. Rivian International (P) Ltd. (ITA 693 of 2015 dated 21/11/2017) 2. Pr. CIT Vs. Huntsman International (India) Pvt.Ltd. (ITA 1619 of 2016) 3. Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (378 ITR 33) 4. Finquest Securities Pvt.Ltd. vs. ACIT [ITA 2540/M/2017] and 5. ACIT Vs. Vireet Investments (P.) Ltd. [82 taxmann.com 415] The learned DR could not controvert the said fact but submitted that disallowance u/s 14A has to be made in terms of CBDT Circular No. 5 of 2014 dated 11/02/2014 which mandate such disallowance notwithstanding the quantum…

Mitsui & Co. India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1672/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P.Kantdy. Cit, Circle-16(2), M/S. Mitsui & Company India New Delhi Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Plot No.D-1, 4Th Floor, Salcon Ras Vilas, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aadcm 4488J (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Mitsui & Company Dcit, Circle-16(2), India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi Plot No.D-1, 4Th Floor, Vs. Salcon Ras Vilas, District Centre Saket, New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aadcm 4488J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C(2)

…dia Pvt. Ltd. be made mandatorily irrespective of the fact whether assessee has received any exempt income during the year or not. The Ld. DRP has deleted the disallowance relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (378 ITR 33) wherein it has been held that in the absence of any exempt income during the year, no disallowance can be made. Further, the Ld. DRP has held that the interest free funds are sufficient to meet that investment made by the assessee. The Learned DR was fair enough to accept that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by various judgments o…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mitsui & Company India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1608/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Jun 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P.Kantdy. Cit, Circle-16(2), M/S. Mitsui & Company India New Delhi Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Plot No.D-1, 4Th Floor, Salcon Ras Vilas, District Centre, Saket, New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aadcm 4488J (Appellant) (Respondent) M/S. Mitsui & Company Dcit, Circle-16(2), India Pvt. Ltd. New Delhi Plot No.D-1, 4Th Floor, Vs. Salcon Ras Vilas, District Centre Saket, New Delhi-110017. Pan-Aadcm 4488J (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C(2)

…dia Pvt. Ltd. be made mandatorily irrespective of the fact whether assessee has received any exempt income during the year or not. The Ld. DRP has deleted the disallowance relying upon the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (378 ITR 33) wherein it has been held that in the absence of any exempt income during the year, no disallowance can be made. Further, the Ld. DRP has held that the interest free funds are sufficient to meet that investment made by the assessee. The Learned DR was fair enough to accept that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by various judgments o…

M/S. Shamanur Kallappa & Sons, Davangere vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle - 1(3), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is allowed

ITA 1669/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B R Baskaranassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri Bharadwaj Sheshadri, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarsi Mishra, Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 234

…ly the assessee has not earned any exempted income. Now it is settled position of law that whenever assessee did not earn any exempt income, no disallowance could be made u/s. 14A of the Act. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Del) has categorically held that section 14A envisages that there should be actual receipt of income which was not includible in the total income during the relevant previous year for the purpose of disallowing any expenditure in relation to the said income. Wherever there is no exempt income includible in the total income of the assessee, the pr…

DCIT Corporate Circle 5(1), Chennai vs. Repco Home Finance P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue in ITA no

ITA 2885/CHNY/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai17 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: JCITFor Respondent: Shri M. Viswanathan, C.A
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(1)(viii)

…Mad.) has held that no disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of the 1961 Act is warranted when there is no exempt income received by tax-payer. We have also observed that Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of M/s.Cheminvest Ltd., v. C.I.T reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi), had held that no disallowance of expenditure is warranted by invoking provisions of section 14A of the Act when no exempt income is received by the tax- payer during the year under consideration . Thus , on this short reasoning alone that no disallowance of expenditure incurred can be made by invoking provisions of Section 14A of the 19…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3996/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153Section 40Section 92C(2)

…ue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the honourable Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest ltd. This fact has not been disputed by the learned departmental representative. Honourable Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd versus CIT 378 ITR 33 and held that:- ―23. In the context of the facts enumerated hereinbefore the court answers the question framed by holding that the expression "does not form part of the total income" in section 14A of the Act envisages that there should be an actual receipt of income, which is not includible in the total income, during the relevant previous year f…

M/S. New Delhi Television Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 3865/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jun 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishinew Delhi Television Ltd, Vs. Acit, 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase- Circle-13(1), Iii, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. New Delhi Television Ltd, Circle-13(1), 207, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi Phase-Iii, New Delhi Pan: Aaacn0865D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H. K. Choudhary, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153Section 40Section 92C(2)

…ue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the honourable Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest ltd. This fact has not been disputed by the learned departmental representative. Honourable Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd versus CIT 378 ITR 33 and held that:- ―23. In the context of the facts enumerated hereinbefore the court answers the question framed by holding that the expression "does not form part of the total income" in section 14A of the Act envisages that there should be an actual receipt of income, which is not includible in the total income, during the relevant previous year f…

M/S. Goldman Sachs Services Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Special Range-3, Bangalore

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

ITA 2355/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A.K. Garodia & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadaleit(Tp)A No.2355/Bang/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) M/S. Goldman Sachs Services Pvt. Ltd., Wing A, B & C, Helios Business Park, 150, Orr, Kadubeesanahalli, Bangalore-560103 ….Appellant Pan Aaccg 2435N Vs. Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Special Range 3, Bangalore. ……Respondent.

For Appellant: Shri Sharath Rao, C.AFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (D.R)
Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…disallowance was deleted in assessee own case for the Assessment Year 2014-15 as no dividend income has been earned on investments. The learned Authorized Representative relied on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 (Del) where the Hon'ble High Court has held that unless and until exempted income is received for the concerned assessment year, the provisions of Section 14A of the Act are not applicable.we find the co-ordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee own case in IT(TP)A No.3244/Bang/2018 for the Assessment Year 2014-15 has dealt at pages 46 & 47 para…

DCIT, Circle - 13(2), Kolkata vs. M/S. Shradha Agencies Private Limited, Howrah

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1362/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara, Jm &Dr. A.L.Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.1362/Kol/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year:2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Dhrubajyoti Roy, JCITFor Respondent: Ankita Manek, ACA
Section 144Section 14ASection 194C(7)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 36(2)Section 40

…that the issue raised by the revenue in ground no. 6 is no longer res integra. Since the assessee does not have any exempt income therefore no disallowance is warranted as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chem Investment vs CIT reported in 317 ITD 33 (Del) wherein it was held that if there is no exempt income earned or received by the assessee, no disallowance is warranted u/s 14A read with Rule 8D of the Rules. Since this issue is squarely covered by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chem Investment (supra) therefore, we dismiss the ground no. 6 raised by the revenue and upheld the…

M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Ward- 7(1)(2), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 37/BANG/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2020AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 74-75 Millers Road, Vasanthnagar, Ward – 7(1)(3), Bengaluru – 560 052. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccv 7868 G The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 -Do- Of Income Tax, Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. S.P. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 29/Bang/2020 M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(1)(3), (In Ita No.2541/Bang/2019) Pan : Aaccv 7868 G Bengaluru. 59/Bang/2020 -Do- The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 Of Income Tax, (In Ita No. 37/Bang/2020) Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. Assessee/S.P. By : Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 56(2)

…n the present year and by restricting the disallowance u/s 14A to the extent of such exempt income earned by the assessee in the present year in line with the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., Vs. CIT as reported in 378 ITR 33 (Del.). Ground No.4 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 14. In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed in terms indicated above. 15. Now, we take up the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17 in ITA No.37/Bang/2020. The grounds raised by the assessee as per revised grounds are as under: 1. That the order of…

M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward - 7(1)(3), Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee for Assessment Year 2016-17 is partly allowed in the terms indicated above

ITA 2541/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Jun 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri A. K. Garodia & Smt. Beena Pillaiappeal No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Pvt. Ltd., Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 74-75 Millers Road, Vasanthnagar, Ward – 7(1)(3), Bengaluru – 560 052. Bengaluru. Pan : Aaccv 7868 G The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 -Do- Of Income Tax, Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. S.P. No. & Appellant Respondent Assessment Year 29/Bang/2020 M/S. Vbhc Value Homes Income Tax Officer, 2015-16 Pvt. Ltd., Ward – 7(1)(3), (In Ita No.2541/Bang/2019) Pan : Aaccv 7868 G Bengaluru. 59/Bang/2020 -Do- The Assistant Commissioner 2016-17 Of Income Tax, (In Ita No. 37/Bang/2020) Ward – 7(1)(2), Bengaluru. Assessee/S.P. By : Shri. S. Ramasubramanian, Ca Revenue By : Ms. Neera Malhotra, Cit(Dr)(Itat), Bengaluru Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 12/06/2020 O R D E R Per A. K. Garodia

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 56(2)

…n the present year and by restricting the disallowance u/s 14A to the extent of such exempt income earned by the assessee in the present year in line with the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., Vs. CIT as reported in 378 ITR 33 (Del.). Ground No.4 of the assessee’s appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. 14. In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed in terms indicated above. 15. Now, we take up the assessee’s appeal for Assessment Year 2016-17 in ITA No.37/Bang/2020. The grounds raised by the assessee as per revised grounds are as under: 1. That the order of…

S.K. Mineral Handling Pvt. Ltd., Keonjhar vs. ACIT, Circle- 1(1), Sambalpur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 347/CTK/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack05 Jun 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Dutta, DR
Section 14A

…he disallowance made by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the CIT (A) on account of dividend income is not called for and the same may be deleted. 5. Ld A.R. also relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chemnivest ltd vs CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) and contended that which was followed by the Delhi Tribunal in the case of Rapid Estates Pvrt Ltd., in ITA No.4137/Del/2013 for A.Y. 2009-10 order dated 30.5.2016, wherein, it was held that no exempt income was earned by the assessee in the relevant assessment P a g e 2 | 7 ITA No.3 47/CTK/201 9 Assessm ent Y ear : 20 10- 11 year and…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Futurz Next Services (P) Ltd., New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2396/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jun 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms Ashima Neb Sr DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)

…. It has been categorically held by the Assessing Officer that no exempt income is earned by the assessee during the year. Thus issue is squarely concluded in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Limited Vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 (Del.) wherein it has been held that Section 14A envisages that there has to be an actual receipt of exempt income during the relevant previous year for purpose of making any disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. Thus, following the decision of the Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in 378 ITR 33 (Del.) (supra) we hold that the learned CIT (Appeals) has correctl…

DCIT, CC-1(3), Kolkata vs. M/S. Emc Limited, Kolkata

In the result, both the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 2149/KOL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 May 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A.L. Saini, Am]

Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 14A

…lied on the Tribunal’s decision in REI Agro Ltd. 144 ITD 141 has given relief to the assessee which order has been confirmed by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court in GA No. 3022 of 2013. We note that the Hon’ble Delhi High court in Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 wherein it has been held that where no exempt income was earned by the assessee, no disallowance could be made under section 14A of the Act. Taking note of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High court as well as Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision, we find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) which warrants any interference from our part and, theref…

DCIT Cen Cir 3(2), Mumbai vs. Jsw Steel Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 6264/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…th the authorities below donot give rise to any substantial question of law. Since no substantial question of law arises in this income tax appeal, the income tax appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. 5. In the case of Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT [(2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del)], 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 question arose, viz., whether the ITAT was…

Jsw Steel Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 3(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed, and appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 6103/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 May 2020AY 2013-14
For Appellant: On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned Assessing
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…th the authorities below donot give rise to any substantial question of law. Since no substantial question of law arises in this income tax appeal, the income tax appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. 5. In the case of Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT [(2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del)], 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 question arose, viz., whether the ITAT was…

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 140/CHANDI/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

…e issue is now squarely covered by the various decisions of the High Courts in favour of the assessee viz.‘CIT, Faridabad Vs. Lakhani Marketing Inc.’ 226 Taxman 45 (P&H ), ‘CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles’ (2009) 319 ITR 204 (P&H), ‘Cheminvest Ltd Vs. ITO’ (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi), ‘Corrtech Energy P. Ltd.’ (2014) 45 Taxman.com 116 (Gujarat High Court) ‘CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd’ (2014) 272 CTR (All) 277. In all the above referred to case laws, the Hon'ble High Courts have been unanimous to hold that no disallowance is attracted u/s 14A of the Act in case the assessee has not earned any income not forming…

M/S Fastway Transmission (P) Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, CC-II, Chandigarh

In the result the captioned appeals of the assessee are

ITA 139/CHANDI/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh28 Apr 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.547/Chd/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Chandrajit Singh, CIT (DR) on 4.12.2019
Section 250(6)

…e issue is now squarely covered by the various decisions of the High Courts in favour of the assessee viz.‘CIT, Faridabad Vs. Lakhani Marketing Inc.’ 226 Taxman 45 (P&H ), ‘CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles’ (2009) 319 ITR 204 (P&H), ‘Cheminvest Ltd Vs. ITO’ (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi), ‘Corrtech Energy P. Ltd.’ (2014) 45 Taxman.com 116 (Gujarat High Court) ‘CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd’ (2014) 272 CTR (All) 277. In all the above referred to case laws, the Hon'ble High Courts have been unanimous to hold that no disallowance is attracted u/s 14A of the Act in case the assessee has not earned any income not forming…