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

M/S Nasa Agro Industries Pvt. Ltd, Fazilka vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- II, Bathinda

In the result, the appeal i

ITA 536/ASR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar21 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N.S.Saini & Sh. N.K.Choudhry

For Appellant: Sh. P.K. Anand (Ld. CA)For Respondent: Smt. Ratinder Kaur (Ld. DR)
Section 14ASection 250(6)

…s in consideration before us. The Assessee claimed that no exempt income earned during the year under consideration. 5. Having heard the parties and examined the orders of authorities below. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CHEMINVEST LTD. V. CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Del) considered the similar and identical issue under consideration and 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 e…

Sagar Yeswantrai Mehta, Ahmedabad vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1)(2)., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1684/AHD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad19 Feb 2019AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1684/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Sagar Yeswantrai Mehta The Acit बनाम/ Laxmi House Circle-2(1)(2) Vs. Swagat Cross Road Ahmedabad Hotel Rock Regency C.G. Road, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Accpm 8669 B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Mehul K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.S.A. Khan, CIT-DR
Section 10(35)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘बी’, अहमदाबाद । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “ B ” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER And SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1684/Ahd/2018 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2015-16) Sagar Yeswantrai Mehta The ACIT बनाम/ Laxmi House Circle-2(1)(2) Vs. Swagat Cross Road Ahmedabad Hotel Rock Regency C.G. Road, Ahmedabad "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : ACCPM 8669 B .. (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) अपीलाथ" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri Mehul K. Patel, AR ""यथ" क" ओर से/Respondent by : Shri M.S.A. Khan,…

Mak Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal of assessee is accordingly allowed

ITA 1576/HYD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad15 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: NONEFor Respondent: Ms. Esther N. Hangal, DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…e of hearing”. 4. The case was fixed for hearing on 28-11-2018, but none appeared for assessee. We find that this issue is covered in favour of assessee. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case :- 4 -: ITA. No. 1576/Hyd/2018 of Cheminvest Ltd., in (2015) [378 ITR 33] (Del) and the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Redington (India) Ltd., Vs. Addl. CIT in TCA No. 520/2016 dt. 26-06-2015 have held that the disallowance u/s. 14A cannot be made where there is no exempt income during the relevant assessment year. Therefore, we set aside the order of Ld.CIT(A) and direct the AO to delete the addition made by…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Oxigen Services India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3766/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Smt NainaSoin Kapil, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh SatyenSethi, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(3)

…o dispute that during the year under consideration no exempt income is derived by the assessee. In view of the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in the cases of Ld. PCIT vs. McDonalds India Ltd (2019) 101 taxmann.com 86, Cheminvest Ltd vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 and Ld. PCIT vs.IL & FS energy development company Ltd (2017) 399 ITR 483 in the absence of any exempt income earned by the assessee in the financial year relevant to the concerned assessment year, no disallowance could be made under section 14 A of the Act. Issue is no longer res Integra and well settled by the aforesaid judgements. We therefore…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Oxigen Services India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3765/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Feb 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Smt NainaSoin Kapil, CIT DRFor Respondent: Sh SatyenSethi, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(3)

…o dispute that during the year under consideration no exempt income is derived by the assessee. In view of the decisions of the jurisdictional High Court in the cases of Ld. PCIT vs. McDonalds India Ltd (2019) 101 taxmann.com 86, Cheminvest Ltd vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 and Ld. PCIT vs.IL & FS energy development company Ltd (2017) 399 ITR 483 in the absence of any exempt income earned by the assessee in the financial year relevant to the concerned assessment year, no disallowance could be made under section 14 A of the Act. Issue is no longer res Integra and well settled by the aforesaid judgements. We therefore…

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

In the result this issue is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 311/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary CIT-D.R
Section 144CSection 36(1)(iii)

…has mechanically proceeded to make disallowance u/s 8D for sum of Rs. 12,37,07,018/-. Now in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Joint Investment (P) Ltd. vs CIT, reported in 372 ITR 694 and Cheminvest vs. CIT, reported in 378 ITR 33, it has been well settled that disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income, therefore, no disallowance could have been made more than the exempt income. Since assessee has already disallowed more than the exempt income, therefore, no further disallowance can be made and same is directed to be deleted. In the result this issue is allowed i…

M/S. Unitech Limited, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result this issue is allowed in favour of the assessee

ITA 6585/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary CIT-D.R
Section 144CSection 36(1)(iii)

…has mechanically proceeded to make disallowance u/s 8D for sum of Rs. 12,37,07,018/-. Now in view of the judgment of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Joint Investment (P) Ltd. vs CIT, reported in 372 ITR 694 and Cheminvest vs. CIT, reported in 378 ITR 33, it has been well settled that disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income, therefore, no disallowance could have been made more than the exempt income. Since assessee has already disallowed more than the exempt income, therefore, no further disallowance can be made and same is directed to be deleted. In the result this issue is allowed i…

Gmr Enterprises Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2148/BANG/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR-II)
Section 14A

…exempt income earned in this year and therefore, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A and in support of his contention, he placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Cheminvest Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33. ITA Nos. 2145, 2146 & 2148/Bang/2016 Page 7 of 8 Regarding this aspect that there is no exempt income in this year, he drawn our attention to page no. 81 of the paper book. It was submitted that audited accounts of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 is available on page nos. 69 to 95 of paper book. It was pointed out that as per P&L Account…

Gmr Enterprises Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2146/BANG/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR-II)
Section 14A

…exempt income earned in this year and therefore, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A and in support of his contention, he placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Cheminvest Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33. ITA Nos. 2145, 2146 & 2148/Bang/2016 Page 7 of 8 Regarding this aspect that there is no exempt income in this year, he drawn our attention to page no. 81 of the paper book. It was submitted that audited accounts of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 is available on page nos. 69 to 95 of paper book. It was pointed out that as per P&L Account…

Gmr Enterprises Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14

ITA 2145/BANG/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Feb 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT (DR-II)
Section 14A

…exempt income earned in this year and therefore, no disallowance can be made u/s. 14A and in support of his contention, he placed reliance on the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Cheminvest Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33. ITA Nos. 2145, 2146 & 2148/Bang/2016 Page 7 of 8 Regarding this aspect that there is no exempt income in this year, he drawn our attention to page no. 81 of the paper book. It was submitted that audited accounts of the assessee for Assessment Year 2013-14 is available on page nos. 69 to 95 of paper book. It was pointed out that as per P&L Account…

Ramya Constructions Limited, Vijayawada vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Vijayawada

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

ITA 341/VIZ/2018[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam06 Feb 2019AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Blem/S. Ramya Constructions, Vs. Dcit, Circle-2(1), C/O T. Chaitanyakumar, Adv., Vijayawada. Flat No. 102, Gouri Apartment, Urdu Lane, Himayath Nagar, Hyderabad. Pan No. Aadcr 1165 K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar– AdvFor Respondent: Shri D.V. Subba Rao – Sr.DR
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Ramya Constructions, vs. DCIT, Circle-2(1), C/o T. Chaitanyakumar, Adv., Vijayawada. Flat No. 102, Gouri Apartment, Urdu Lane, Himayath Nagar, Hyderabad. PAN No. AADCR 1165 K (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri T. Chaitanya Kumar– Adv. Department By : Shri D.V. Subba Rao – Sr.DR Date of hearing : 24/01/2019. Date of pronouncement : 06/02/2019. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal by the assessee is directed…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Jaipur vs. M/S Mahindra World City (Jaipur) Ltd., Jaipur

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

ITA 697/JPR/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur04 Feb 2019AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri Rohan Sogani &For Respondent: Shri J.C. Kulhari (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…refore, in view of the binding precedents on this issue, the disallowance made U/s 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules, cannot be more than the exempt income. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax-IV 378 ITR 33 has held that if there is no exempt income earned by the assessee during the year, no disallowance can be made on account of administrative expenditure, therefore, we find that the disallowance restricted by the ld. CIT(A) to the extent of exempt income is proper and justified. 13. In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for sta…

The Asstt. Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham Circle, Gandhidham vs. M/S Rishi Kiran Logistics P. Ltd., Gandhidham

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

ITA 379/RJT/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jan 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Shri M.J. Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 40A(2)(a)Section 44ASection 80I

…akeover. Therefore, investment was not made with a view to earn any exempt income or to earn dividend and hence, in such scenario provision of section 14A of the Act cannot be invoked - Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 has held if no exempt income has been earned by the assessee in ITA Nos.160/Rjt/15 9 & ITA 349 & 379/Ahd/2016 . A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 the relevant assessment year then no disallowance can be made u/s. 14a of Income Tax Act.. 18. As we can see, assessee was having substantial interest free funds, it is fact that as per paper book inte…

M/S. Rishi Kiran Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Gandhidham vs. The Joint Commr. of Income Tax, Gandhidham

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

ITA 160/RJT/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot31 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Mahavir Prasad & Shri Waseem Ahmed)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Kumar, CIT/DRFor Respondent: Shri M.J. Ranpura, A.R
Section 143(3)Section 144ASection 14ASection 40A(2)(a)Section 44ASection 80I

…akeover. Therefore, investment was not made with a view to earn any exempt income or to earn dividend and hence, in such scenario provision of section 14A of the Act cannot be invoked - Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 has held if no exempt income has been earned by the assessee in ITA Nos.160/Rjt/15 9 & ITA 349 & 379/Ahd/2016 . A.Ys. 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 the relevant assessment year then no disallowance can be made u/s. 14a of Income Tax Act.. 18. As we can see, assessee was having substantial interest free funds, it is fact that as per paper book inte…

ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Indokem Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5259/MUM/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon'Bleincome Tax Officer – 6(3)(2) V. M/S. Indokem Ltd., R.No. 503, 5Th Floor, 410/411, Khatau House, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ground Floor, Mumbai-400 020 Mogul Lane, Mahim Mumbai – 400 016 Pan: Aaaci 2959 M (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nitesh S. Joshi Department By : Shri Abi Rama Kartikeyan

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh S. JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Abi Rama Kartikeyan
Section 10(34)Section 14A

…th the parties and perused the material available on record. At the time of hearing, the learned AR for the assessee submitted that the issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del), wherein it has been categorically held that section 14A will not apply if no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration. Although the assessee has claimed exemption u/s. 10(34) fo…

DCIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Future Market Networks Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5234/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Shri Shushil Kumar Poddar
Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…rpur Industries Ltd., ITA no.51/2016, dated 13.10.2016, (Bom.); ii) CIT v/s Delite Enterprises, ITA no.110 of 2009, order dated 26.02.2009 (Bom.) iii) CIT v/s Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad.); iv) Cheminvest Ltd. v/s CIT, [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del.); v) CIT v/s Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd., [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj.); vi) CIT v/s Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd., [2014] 272 CTR 277 (All.); vii) CIT v/s Lakhani Marketing Inc. [2014] 272 CTR 265 (P&H); viii) ACIT v/s Gini &Jony Ltd., [2018] 172 ITD 472 (Mum. Trib.); ix) ACIT v/s dish TV India Ltd. [2018] 194 TTJ 897 (Mum.); x) DCIT v/s Instant Traders…

DCIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Future Consumer Limited (Formerly Known As Future Consumer Enterprises Limited ), Mumbai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5233/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Miss Dipika Arora
Section 32Section 32(1)(iii)

…rpur Industries Ltd., ITA no.51/2016, dated 13.10.2016, (Bom.); ii) CIT v/s Delite Enterprises, ITA no.110 of 2009, order dated 26.02.2009 (Bom.) iii) CIT v/s Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad.); iv) Cheminvest Ltd. v/s CIT, [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del.); v) CIT v/s Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd., [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj.); vi) CIT v/s Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd., [2014] 272 CTR 277 (All.); vii) CIT v/s Lakhani Marketing Inc. [2014] 272 CTR 265 (P&H); viii) ACIT v/s Gini &Jony Ltd., [2018] 172 ITD 472 (Mum. Trib.); ix) ACIT v/s dish TV India Ltd. [2018] 194 TTJ 897 (Mum.); x) DCIT v/s Instant Traders…

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Tata Teleservices (Mah) Ltd, Navi Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2519/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Vice- & Shri Pawan Singhdcit-8(3)(1) M/S Tata Teleservices (Mah) Room No. 615, 6Th Floor, Ltd., D-26, Ttc Indl Area Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Midc, Sanpada, P.O. Turbhe, Mumbai-20. Navi Mumbai-400703. Vs. Pan: Aaach1458C Appellant Respondent Appellant By : Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy (Cit-Dr) Respondent By : Shri Hiten Chande (Ar) Date Of Hearing : 21.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement : 30.01.2019 Order Under Section 254(1)Of Income Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri R. Manjunatha SwamyFor Respondent: Shri Hiten Chande (AR)
Section 14ASection 194HSection 201(1)Section 254(1)Section 40

…Mah) Ltd. 6. Ground No.2 & 3 relates to disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that this ground of appeal is also covered in favour of assessee by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Chemnivest Ltd. vs. CIT [378 ITR 33 (Del)]. The ld. AR of the assessee further submits that during the relevant Financial Year, the assessee has not earned any dividend income, therefore; no disallowance under section 14A is warranted. 7. On the other hand, the ld. DR for the Revenue supported the order of Assessing Officer. The ld. DR also relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supr…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1), Guntur vs. Nsl Textiles Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue as well as cross objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 349/VIZ/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam25 Jan 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-2(1), Vs. M/S. Nsl Textiles Ltd., Nsl Icon, 4Th Floor, D.No. Guntur. 8-2-684/2/A, Banjara Hills, Road No. 12, Hyderabad. Pan No. Aabcj 1299 A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N. Hari – AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri V. Appala Raju – Sr.DR
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACIT, Circle-2(1), vs. M/s. NSL Textiles Ltd., NSL Icon, 4th Floor, D.No. Guntur. 8-2-684/2/A, Banjara Hills, Road No. 12, Hyderabad. PAN No. AABCJ 1299 A (Appellant) (Respondent) C.O.No. 128/VIZ/2018 (Arising out of ITA No. 349/VIZ/2018) (Asst. Year : 2010-11) M/s. NSL Textiles Ltd., vs. ACIT, Circle-2(1), NSL Icon, 4th Floor, D.No. Guntur. 8-2-684/2/A, Banjara Hills, Road No. 12, Hyderabad. PAN No. AABCJ 1299 A (Applicant) (Respondent) A…

DCIT, Circle - 11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Confident Solar Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 252/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 Jan 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. J.Sudhakar Reddy & Sh.S.S.Viswanethra Ravidcit, Vs M/S. Confident Solar Pvt.Ltd., Circle-11(1), P-7, 60A, D.H.Road, Thakurpukur, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700063. Kolkata-700069. Pan-Aaecc2709D (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By R.Shyam, Cit Dr Respondent By Ananya Rath Date Of Hearing 17.01.2019 Date Of Pronouncement 25.01.2019

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e material available on record. The contention of the Ld.AR is that no exempt income was earned by the assessee during the year under consideration and the CIT(A) in the first appellate proceedings by placing reliance in the decision of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs CIT 378 ITR 33 deleted the addition. The Ld.AR argued when there is no exempt income earned, no disallowance is maintainable. Ld. DR did not controvert the same. On perusal of the impugned order at para 4.2, it is noted that the CIT(A) examined the record and found satisfied that no exempt income was earned by the assessee. For ready-reference, the relevant port…