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 366,470 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

Fena Private Limited, Delhi vs. Assessment Unit, NFAC, Income Tax Department, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2475/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(3)

…eld that disallowance of expenses under section 14A of the Act could be made even when no exempt income has been earned or received by the Assessee. This decision has been subsequently reversed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the very same case reported in 378 ITR 33(Del). Either way, this principle is not at all applicable here as exempt income had been received by the assessee in the instant case. The Assessee’s explanation right from the beginning was that it had not incurred any expenditure for the purpose of earning such income. This explanation need to be proved as incorrect by the Learned AO by recordin…

Fena Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Additional, Joint, Deputy, ACIT, ITO, National E-Assessment Centre, Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the Assessee are partly allowed

ITA 2474/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(3)

…eld that disallowance of expenses under section 14A of the Act could be made even when no exempt income has been earned or received by the Assessee. This decision has been subsequently reversed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the very same case reported in 378 ITR 33(Del). Either way, this principle is not at all applicable here as exempt income had been received by the assessee in the instant case. The Assessee’s explanation right from the beginning was that it had not incurred any expenditure for the purpose of earning such income. This explanation need to be proved as incorrect by the Learned AO by recordin…

Indus Valley Properties Private Limited, Kabra Excelcior vs. Income Tax Officer Ward 3(1)(4) Bangalore, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 81/BANG/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ganesh R. Ghale, Standing Counsel
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of the Act can be made. We find that if there is no exempt income, there cannot be any disallowance u/s. 14A of the ITA No.81/Bang/2025. Page 4 of 19 Act, as has been held so by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of:- • Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT I[2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del) • PCIT v. Alchemist Ltd., 167 taxmann.com 284 • PCIT v. Era Infrastructure Ltd., 448 ITR 674 (Del) • PCIT v. Sahara India Finance Corporation Ltd., 168 taxmann.com 165 11. Further the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Biocon Ltd. v. DCIT in 125 taxmann.com 164 has also categorically held that where there was no exempt income accrue…

ACIT- 4 2 1, Mumbai City vs. Hathway Investments Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the revenue’s appeals are dismissed, whereas the cross objections filed by the Assessee’s are allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 1482/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Prabhash Shankar & Co No. 90/Mum/2025 {Assessment Year: 2014-15} A N D & Co No. 91/Mum/2025 {Assessment Year: 2017-18}

For Appellant: Shri Priyesh Vora (Virtually)For Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi (SR DR)
Section 10(34)Section 115Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & CO No. 90/Mum/2025 {Assessment Year: 2014-15} A N D & CO No. 91/Mum/2025 {Assessment Year: 2017-18} Assistant Commissioner of Hathway Investments Income Tax 4 (2) (1) Pvt Ltd. Room No. 640, Aayakar Bhavan, 4th Floor Rahejas, Corner of VS. Churchgate 400020 Main Avenue and VP Road, Santacruz west, Mumbai 400054. PAN: AAACH1675B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Priyesh Vora (Virtually) Revenue by : Shri Himanshu Joshi (SR DR) Dat…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai City vs. Hathway Investments Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the revenue’s appeals are dismissed, whereas the cross objections filed by the Assessee’s are allowed, for statistical purposes

ITA 1481/MUM/2025[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhryshri Prabhash Shankar & Co No. 90/Mum/2025 {Assessment Year: 2014-15} A N D & Co No. 91/Mum/2025 {Assessment Year: 2017-18}

For Appellant: Shri Priyesh Vora (Virtually)For Respondent: Shri Himanshu Joshi (SR DR)
Section 10(34)Section 115Section 142(1)Section 14ASection 250

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI NARENDER KUMAR CHOUDHRY, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI PRABHASH SHANKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & CO No. 90/Mum/2025 {Assessment Year: 2014-15} A N D & CO No. 91/Mum/2025 {Assessment Year: 2017-18} Assistant Commissioner of Hathway Investments Income Tax 4 (2) (1) Pvt Ltd. Room No. 640, Aayakar Bhavan, 4th Floor Rahejas, Corner of VS. Churchgate 400020 Main Avenue and VP Road, Santacruz west, Mumbai 400054. PAN: AAACH1675B (Appellant) (Respondent) Present for: Assessee by : Shri Priyesh Vora (Virtually) Revenue by : Shri Himanshu Joshi (SR DR) Dat…

Jindal Saw Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-13(2), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 504/DEL/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…ITA Nos.826 & 1000/Del/2016, 4693 & 4760/Del/2019 & 504/Del/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. vs DCIT, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.CIT Range-4), PAN-AABCS7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2011-12] DCIT, vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly known as M/s. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi PAN-…

DCIT Circle-13(2), New Delhi vs. Jindal Saw Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4760/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…ITA Nos.826 & 1000/Del/2016, 4693 & 4760/Del/2019 & 504/Del/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. vs DCIT, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.CIT Range-4), PAN-AABCS7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2011-12] DCIT, vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly known as M/s. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi PAN-…

Jindal Saw Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT Circle-13(2), New Delhi

In the result, assessee’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 4693/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jun 2025AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Manish Agarwal[Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Dcit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.Cit Range-4), Pan-Aabcs7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Dcit, Vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly Known As M/S. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2014-15] Jindal Saw Ltd., Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Shivaji Marg, Circle-13(2), New Delhi-110015. New Delhi. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2015-16] Jindal Saw Ltd. Vs Acit, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) P.O.Ramesh Nagar, C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi-110002. Pan-Aabcs7280C Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 234BSection 43B

…ITA Nos.826 & 1000/Del/2016, 4693 & 4760/Del/2019 & 504/Del/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI “B” BENCH: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI MANISH AGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER [Assessment Year : 2011-12] Jindal Saw Ltd. vs DCIT, 28, Najafgarh Road, Circle-13(2) New Delhi-110015. (Earlier Addl.CIT Range-4), PAN-AABCS7280C C.R.Building, I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002. APPELLANT RESPONDENT [Assessment Year : 2011-12] DCIT, vs Jindal Saw Ltd. Circle-13(2), (Formerly known as M/s. Saw Pipes Room No.316A, Ltd.), 28, Najafgarh Road, C.R.Building, New Delhi-110015. New Delhi PAN-…

ACIT-8(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Retail Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the revenue is dismissed and cross objection by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 4251/MUM/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon'Ble & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agarwal, Advocate, Shri NimeshFor Respondent: Smt. Sanyogita Nagpal, CIT DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON'BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI GIRISH AGRAWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2018-19 Assistant Commissioner of Reliance Retail Ltd., Income Tax – 8(1)(1), 3rd Floor, Court House, Mumbai Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Vs. Dhobi Talao, Mumbai – 400 002 (PAN : AABCR1718E) (Appellant) (Respondent) CO No.194/Mum/2024 (Arising out of ITA 4251/Mum/2024) Assessment Year: 2018-19 Reliance Retail Ltd., Assistant Commissioner of 3rd Floor, Court House, Income Tax – 8(1)(1), Lokmanya Tilak Marg, Mumbai Dhobi Talao, Vs. Mumbai – 400 002 (PAN :…

E-Ally Securities (India) Pvt. Ltd., Raigad vs. DCIT Circle, Panvel

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 109/PUN/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 May 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Shri Vinay Bhamoreassessment Year : 2018-19

For Appellant: Shri Samir ShahFor Respondent: Shri Shashank Ojha - JCIT
Section 143(2)Section 14A

…mpt income that has been earned by the assessee. 11. We find the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of PCIT vs. HSBC Invest Direct (India) Ltd. (supra) following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) and in the case of CIT vs. Holcim India (P) Ltd. in ITA No.486 of 2014, order dated 05.09.2014 has held that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income earned. Similarly, in the case of Nirved Traders Pvt. Ltd. vs. DCIT 5 (supra), the Hon’ble Bombay High Court has held that the disallowance u/s 14A read with Rule 8D cannot exc…

DCIT, Range-6, Lucknow vs. M/S. U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 229/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

…e view that no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act can be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income; in the cases reported at Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 61 I.T.A. No.227/Lkw/2020, 229/Lkw/20, 587/Lkw/19, 485/Lkw/19, 588/Lkw/19 12 taxmann.com 118/378 ITR 33 (Del) and Pr. CIT vs. IL&FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 186/399 ITR 483 (Del), CIT vs. Holcim India Private Limited 272 CTR 282 (Delhi)/(2014) 90 CCH 081- DEL (vide order dated 05/09/2014 in I.T.A. No.486 and 299/2014). It will be helpful to read the following portion of the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CI…

U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd., Lucknow vs. DCIT, Range-VI, Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 227/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

…e view that no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act can be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income; in the cases reported at Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 61 I.T.A. No.227/Lkw/2020, 229/Lkw/20, 587/Lkw/19, 485/Lkw/19, 588/Lkw/19 12 taxmann.com 118/378 ITR 33 (Del) and Pr. CIT vs. IL&FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 186/399 ITR 483 (Del), CIT vs. Holcim India Private Limited 272 CTR 282 (Delhi)/(2014) 90 CCH 081- DEL (vide order dated 05/09/2014 in I.T.A. No.486 and 299/2014). It will be helpful to read the following portion of the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CI…

DCIT, Lucknow vs. M/S U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 588/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

…e view that no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act can be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income; in the cases reported at Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 61 I.T.A. No.227/Lkw/2020, 229/Lkw/20, 587/Lkw/19, 485/Lkw/19, 588/Lkw/19 12 taxmann.com 118/378 ITR 33 (Del) and Pr. CIT vs. IL&FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 186/399 ITR 483 (Del), CIT vs. Holcim India Private Limited 272 CTR 282 (Delhi)/(2014) 90 CCH 081- DEL (vide order dated 05/09/2014 in I.T.A. No.486 and 299/2014). It will be helpful to read the following portion of the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CI…

DCIT, Lucknow vs. M/S U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 587/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

…e view that no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act can be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income; in the cases reported at Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 61 I.T.A. No.227/Lkw/2020, 229/Lkw/20, 587/Lkw/19, 485/Lkw/19, 588/Lkw/19 12 taxmann.com 118/378 ITR 33 (Del) and Pr. CIT vs. IL&FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 186/399 ITR 483 (Del), CIT vs. Holcim India Private Limited 272 CTR 282 (Delhi)/(2014) 90 CCH 081- DEL (vide order dated 05/09/2014 in I.T.A. No.486 and 299/2014). It will be helpful to read the following portion of the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CI…

DCIT, Lucknow vs. M/S U.P. State Sugar Corporation Ltd., Lucknow

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 485/LKW/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

Section 14A

…e view that no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act can be made if the assessee has not earned any exempt income; in the cases reported at Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT [2015] 61 I.T.A. No.227/Lkw/2020, 229/Lkw/20, 587/Lkw/19, 485/Lkw/19, 588/Lkw/19 12 taxmann.com 118/378 ITR 33 (Del) and Pr. CIT vs. IL&FS Energy Development Co. Ltd. [2017] 84 taxmann.com 186/399 ITR 483 (Del), CIT vs. Holcim India Private Limited 272 CTR 282 (Delhi)/(2014) 90 CCH 081- DEL (vide order dated 05/09/2014 in I.T.A. No.486 and 299/2014). It will be helpful to read the following portion of the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CI…

M/S Inditrade Capital Ltd (Previously Known As "Jrg Securities Ltd"), Kochi vs. The ITO, Corporate Ward1(1), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 243/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2025AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Sri.Aneesh Vishwanathan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…dismissed the SLP filed by the Department on the ground of delay as well as on merits.] 11 ITA No.239/Coch/2023 & Ors. M/s.Inditrade Capital Limited. (ii) CIT v. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC) (iii) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) (iv) Pr.CIT v. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 452 ITR 206) (Delhi) (v) Pr.CIT v. Novell Software Development (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 434 ITR 154 (Karn.) [The Hon’ble Supreme Court also dismissed the SLP filed by the department in the case of Pr.CIT v. GVK Project and Technical Services Ltd. (2019) 106 taxmann.com 180 (Delhi) both on delay…

M/S Inditrade Capital Ltd (Previously Known As, Kochi vs. The ITO, Corporate Ward1(1), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 242/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Sri.Aneesh Vishwanathan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…dismissed the SLP filed by the Department on the ground of delay as well as on merits.] 11 ITA No.239/Coch/2023 & Ors. M/s.Inditrade Capital Limited. (ii) CIT v. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC) (iii) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) (iv) Pr.CIT v. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 452 ITR 206) (Delhi) (v) Pr.CIT v. Novell Software Development (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 434 ITR 154 (Karn.) [The Hon’ble Supreme Court also dismissed the SLP filed by the department in the case of Pr.CIT v. GVK Project and Technical Services Ltd. (2019) 106 taxmann.com 180 (Delhi) both on delay…

M/S Inditrade Capital Ltd (Previously Known As, Kochi vs. The ITO, Corporate Ward1(1), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 241/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Sri.Aneesh Vishwanathan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…dismissed the SLP filed by the Department on the ground of delay as well as on merits.] 11 ITA No.239/Coch/2023 & Ors. M/s.Inditrade Capital Limited. (ii) CIT v. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC) (iii) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) (iv) Pr.CIT v. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 452 ITR 206) (Delhi) (v) Pr.CIT v. Novell Software Development (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 434 ITR 154 (Karn.) [The Hon’ble Supreme Court also dismissed the SLP filed by the department in the case of Pr.CIT v. GVK Project and Technical Services Ltd. (2019) 106 taxmann.com 180 (Delhi) both on delay…

M/S Inditrade Capital Ltd (Previously Known As, Kochi vs. The ITO, Corporate Ward1(1), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 240/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Sri.Aneesh Vishwanathan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…dismissed the SLP filed by the Department on the ground of delay as well as on merits.] 11 ITA No.239/Coch/2023 & Ors. M/s.Inditrade Capital Limited. (ii) CIT v. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC) (iii) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) (iv) Pr.CIT v. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 452 ITR 206) (Delhi) (v) Pr.CIT v. Novell Software Development (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 434 ITR 154 (Karn.) [The Hon’ble Supreme Court also dismissed the SLP filed by the department in the case of Pr.CIT v. GVK Project and Technical Services Ltd. (2019) 106 taxmann.com 180 (Delhi) both on delay…

M/S Inditrade Capital Ltd (Previously Known As, Kochi vs. The ITO, Corporate Ward1(1), Kochi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 239/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin14 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Sri.Aneesh Vishwanathan, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior AR
Section 143(3)Section 32(1)(ii)

…dismissed the SLP filed by the Department on the ground of delay as well as on merits.] 11 ITA No.239/Coch/2023 & Ors. M/s.Inditrade Capital Limited. (ii) CIT v. Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. (2018) 95 taxmann.com 250 (SC) (iii) Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) (iv) Pr.CIT v. Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd. (2023) 452 ITR 206) (Delhi) (v) Pr.CIT v. Novell Software Development (India) Pvt. Ltd. (2021) 434 ITR 154 (Karn.) [The Hon’ble Supreme Court also dismissed the SLP filed by the department in the case of Pr.CIT v. GVK Project and Technical Services Ltd. (2019) 106 taxmann.com 180 (Delhi) both on delay…