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 367,302 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

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S Ideb Projects P Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1389/BANG/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Nov 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR-I
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1388 and 138 9/Bang/2014 Assessment years : 2010-11, 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. IDEB Projects Pvt. Ltd., 10th Floor, Delta Tower, Sigma Income Tax, Circle 11(4), Soft Tech Park, 5th Floor, Rastrothana Bhavan, Whitefield Road, Varthur Kodi, Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore – 560 066. Bangalore – 560 001. PAN : AAACI 5570 N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR-I Assessee by : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Date of hearing :…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore vs. M/S Ideb Projects P Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, Revenue’s appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 is dismissed

ITA 1388/BANG/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri. Narendra Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR-I
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JASON P. BOAZ, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.1388 and 138 9/Bang/2014 Assessment years : 2010-11, 2011-12 Deputy Commissioner of Vs. M/s. IDEB Projects Pvt. Ltd., 10th Floor, Delta Tower, Sigma Income Tax, Circle 11(4), Soft Tech Park, 5th Floor, Rastrothana Bhavan, Whitefield Road, Varthur Kodi, Nrupathunga Road, Bangalore – 560 066. Bangalore – 560 001. PAN : AAACI 5570 N APPELLANT RESPONDENT Revenue by : Shri. C. H. Sundar Rao, CIT-DR-I Assessee by : Shri. Narendra Sharma, Advocate Date of hearing :…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi -7 vs. M/S. Planman Consulting Pvt. Ltd

ITA/1221/2018HC Delhi02 Nov 2018

Bench: The Due Date Of The Filing Of The Return. Accordingly, This Issue Is Covered By Decision Of This Court In Ita No.1063/2008, Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. Aimil Ltd. Dated 23Rd December, 2009.

Section 14ASection 260A

…y decision dated 22nd October, 2018 in ITA No.725/2018, Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-6, New Delhi Vs. McDonalds India Pvt. Ltd. and two decisions of this High Court quoted therein, namely, Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax IV [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) and Commissioner of Income-tax –IV Vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 282 (Delhi). Decision of the Supreme Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income tax, (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC) also affirms the said view. The second issue/question relates to late deposit of Provident Fund, share of Employees State Insurance…

Global Calcium Private Limited, Hosur vs. ACIT Company Circle II(2), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1229/CHNY/2018[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Oct 2018AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकरअपीलसं/.I.T.A. No. 1229/Chny/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2005-06

For Appellant: Shri. M. Viswanathan, CAFor Respondent: Mrs. G.D. Jayanthi Angayarkanni, JCIT
Section 14ASection 263

…it has not shown any expenditure. The AO determined u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D Rs. 1,56,453/- an expenditure relatable to the exempt income. Aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal. The Ld. CIT(A) after considering the decisions in the cases of Chem Invest vs CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Del), this tribunal decision in the case of ACIT vs M. Bhaskara, 152 ITD 844, held that disallowances could be restricted to the extent of exempt income and in this case, the disallowance made by the AO being at Rs 1,58,453/-, which is less than the exempt income earned by the :- 4 -: assessee, confirmed the disallowance made by the AO. In this…

ACIT 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. D.D. Cotton P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue as well as the Cross Objection filed by the assessee, are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2922/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2012-13 The Acit-3(1)(1), M/S D.D. Cotton Pvt. Ltd., Room No. 607, Aayakar Bhavan, 903, Tulsiyani Chamber, Mumbai - 400020 212 Backway Reclamation Vs. Nariman Point, Mumbai - 400021 Pan: Aaacd4819K (Appellant) (Respondent) Co No. 258/Mum/2018 (Arising Out Of Ita No.2922/Mum/2017) Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S D.D. Cotton Pvt. Ltd., The Acit-3(1)(1), C/O Shankarlal Jain & Associates Room No. 601, Aayakar Bhavan, Llp, Chartered Accountants, Mumbai - 400020 12 Engineering Building, Vs. 265 Princes Street, Mumbai - 400020 Pan: Aaacd4819K (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri E. Sridhar (Cit Dr) Assessee By : Shri S.L. Jain (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 19/09/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 31/10/2018

For Appellant: Shri S.L. Jain (AR)For Respondent: Shri E. Sridhar (CIT DR)
Section 143Section 14ASection 43Section 73

…more than the investments made during the relevant year. In respect of disallowance under rule 8D(2)(iii), the assessee relied on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of ABC India Ltd. vs. ACIT, 374 ITR 108 and Cheminvestment Ltd. vs. CIT ,378 ITR 33 and contended that only investments on which exempt income earned should be considered for arriving at average investments under the said rule. As regards mutual funds not yielding dividend income, the assessee relied on the decision of the coordinate Bench in the case of Manugraph India Ltd. vs. DCIT ITA No 4761/Mum/2013 and the decision of the C…

DCIT CC 3(1) Cen RG 3, Mumbai vs. Wind World Wind Farms (Krishna) Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of Revenue as well as CO of assessee are dismissed

ITA 118/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Oct 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh

For Appellant: Shri SK Bepari, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rushabh Mamania, AR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…t, Nagpur Bench in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Ballarpur Industries Limited in Income Tax Appeal No. 51 of 2016, wherein this issue has been considered and finally following the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) held as under: - “On hearing the learned Counsel for the Department and on a perusal of the impugned orders, it appears that both the Authorities have recorded a clear finding of fact that there was no exempt income earned by the assessee. While holding so, the Authorities relied on the judgment of the Delhi High Court in Income Tax Appea…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Ausom Enterprise Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1520/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 857/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR
Section 10ASection 143(2)

…fiable to disallow the expenditure more than the tax free income. We can make reference to the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Correctch Energy P.Ltd., 223 taxmann 130 and Delhi High Court decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33. Considering the above, we would like to observe that if we estimate adhoc disallowance for expenditure ought to be incurred for earning tax free income, such estimated expenses are to be worked out Rs.10,000/-; Rs.20,000/-; ITA No.1519/Ahd/2016 and 2 Others DCIT Vs. Ausom Enterprise Ltd. Rs.30,000/- in the Asstt.Years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-1…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Ausom Enterprise Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 1519/AHD/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 857/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR
Section 10ASection 143(2)

…fiable to disallow the expenditure more than the tax free income. We can make reference to the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Correctch Energy P.Ltd., 223 taxmann 130 and Delhi High Court decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33. Considering the above, we would like to observe that if we estimate adhoc disallowance for expenditure ought to be incurred for earning tax free income, such estimated expenses are to be worked out Rs.10,000/-; Rs.20,000/-; ITA No.1519/Ahd/2016 and 2 Others DCIT Vs. Ausom Enterprise Ltd. Rs.30,000/- in the Asstt.Years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-1…

M/S Gemini Distilleries Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-3(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 829/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore12 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sunil Kumar Yadav & Shri Arun Kumar Garodiaassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri V. Srinivasan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shakir Hussain S, CIT (DR)
Section 115JSection 14ASection 263

…ts has to be examined. The first aspect to be examined is this as to whether there was actual receipt of dividend in the present year or not because it has been held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT as reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33 that if there is no exempt income in the present year, there cannot be disallowance u/s. 14A in the present year. There is no finding of Pr. CIT in the impugned order whether the assessee was having any exempt income in the present year or not. Similarly even if the assessee is having exempt income and disallowance has to be made, quantum of disal…

ACIT - 3(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Bharat Serums and Vaccines Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 699/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Padma Ram, DRFor Respondent: S/shri Nitesh Joshi
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…Aayakr ApIlaIya AiQakrNa “B” nyaayapIz maMuba[- mao. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री मनोज कुमार अग्रवाल लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 699/Mum/2017 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2012-13) The Asst. Commissioner of Bharat Serums and Income Tax, Circle 3(1)(1), Vaccines Ltd. 6th 17th Floor, Hoechst Nariman Room No. 607, Floor, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400 Point, Mumbai-400 021 020 .. (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) स्थायी लेखा िं./PAN No. AAACB243…

ITO 14(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Supreme Realty P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 892/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Ravish Soodita Nos. 892 & 893/Mum/2017 (Assessment Year: 2012-13 & 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Mohan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Nishant Samaiya, D.R
Section 10Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…arat in the case of CIT Vs. Cortech Energy (P) Ltd. (2014) 223 taxman 130 (Guj); Hon‟ble High Court of Allahabad in the case of CIT vs. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (ITA No. 88/2014); and the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del). The CIT(A) taking support of the aforesaid facts read with view taken by the Hon‟ble courts, thus, did find favour with the contention of the assessee and deleted the disallowance of Rs. 1,82,80,184/- made by the A.O under Sec. 14A of the Act. 6. The revenue being aggrieved with the order of the CIT(A) has carried the matter in appeal befor…

Asst CIT Cir 6(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Ask Investment Managers P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical

ITA 534/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G. Manjunathaassessment Year 2012-13 Acit M/S Ask Investment Circle-6(1)(2), Managers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.536, 5Th Floor, 1St Floor Bandbox House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dr. Ab Road, Worli, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400030 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. Aafca2302P Shri Nitin Waghmode-Dr राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By Shri J.D. Mistri Sr. Advocate

Section 115JSection 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,‘ए’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “A”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथ, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri JOGINDER SINGH, Judicial Member, and Shri G. MANJUNATHA, Accountant Member Assessment Year 2012-13 ACIT M/s Ask Investment Circle-6(1)(2), Managers Pvt. Ltd. बनाम/ R. No.536, 5th Floor, 1st Floor Bandbox House, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Dr. AB Road, Worli, M. K. Road, Churchgate, Mumbai-400030 Mumbai-400020 (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee) P.A. No. AAFCA2302P Shri Nitin Waghmode-DR राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by "नधा"रती क" ओर से…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. M/S. Ausom Enterprise Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are partly allowed

ITA 857/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 1519 & 1520/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2012-13 & आयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 857/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri M.K. Patel, ARFor Respondent: Shri S.K. Dev, Sr.DR
Section 10ASection 143(2)

…fiable to disallow the expenditure more than the tax free income. We can make reference to the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Correctch Energy P.Ltd., 223 taxmann 130 and Delhi High Court decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33. Considering the above, we would like to observe that if we estimate adhoc disallowance for expenditure ought to be incurred for earning tax free income, such estimated expenses are to be worked out Rs.10,000/-; Rs.20,000/-; ITA No.1519/Ahd/2016 and 2 Others DCIT Vs. Ausom Enterprise Ltd. Rs.30,000/- in the Asstt.Years 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2013-1…

DCIT CC 7(2), Mumbai vs. Manba Finance Ltd, Mumbai

ITA 1448/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Chaudhary Arunkumar SinghFor Respondent: Dr. P. Daniel
Section 133ASection 68

…disallowance u/s. 14A was deleted by the ld. CIT(A) on the ground that no addition u/s. 14A is permissible when no exempt income is shown. For this proposition, he referred to the Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vs CIT [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del). 29. Against the above order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 30. We have heard both the counsel and perused the records. We find that in the grounds of appeal in this regard the Revenue has urged as under: 1. 1. ""In the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.9,00,00,000/~, ma…

ACIT 13(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Sodexo Food Solutions India P. Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5781/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5781/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Income Tax-13(2)(1) Private Limited बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Vs. Ramchandra Lane Extension Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5707/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax-13(2)(1) बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Ramchandra Lane Extension Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Nimesh Vora, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Rignesh Das, Ld. JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

…stries Ltd Hon’ble Bombay High Court ITA No. 51 of 2016 2. CIT Vs Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Madras High Court 80 Taxmann.com 221 3. CIT Vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 111 DTR 158 4. Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT Hon’ble Delhi High Court 378 ITR 33 5. PCIT Vs IL&FS Energy Dev. Co. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 84 Taxmann.com 186 Ltd. 6. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 7. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 8. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 9. CIT Vs. Wins…

Sodexo Food Solutions India P .Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5707/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5781/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Income Tax-13(2)(1) Private Limited बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Vs. Ramchandra Lane Extension Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5707/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax-13(2)(1) बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Ramchandra Lane Extension Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Nimesh Vora, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Rignesh Das, Ld. JCIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

…stries Ltd Hon’ble Bombay High Court ITA No. 51 of 2016 2. CIT Vs Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Madras High Court 80 Taxmann.com 221 3. CIT Vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 111 DTR 158 4. Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT Hon’ble Delhi High Court 378 ITR 33 5. PCIT Vs IL&FS Energy Dev. Co. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 84 Taxmann.com 186 Ltd. 6. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 7. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 8. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 9. CIT Vs. Wins…

Phillip Capital (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 4093/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2009-10
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ontentions and found from record that during the year under consideration the assessee has earned total exempt income of Rs.1,63,773/- in the form of dividend. Following the proposition of law laid down by the Delhi High Court in the case of Chem Invest Ltd., 281 CTR 447, we direct the AO to restrict the disallowance u/s.14A to the extent of exempt income. 5. In ground No. 2 the assessee is aggrieved for addition / disallowance of interest of Rs.21,29,317/-. We found that CIT(A) has restored the matter back to the file of the AO to verify the use of the interest bearing funds. It was pointed out by learned AR tha…

Moserbaer India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1617/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblemoserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Astt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Moserbaer India Ltd. Circle 5(1) Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, New Delhi Phase-Iii New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) Aaam0322J (Respondent) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Dcit Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Circle 17(1) Phase-Iii New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Respondent) Aaam0322J (Appellant)

Section 10BSection 143Section 144CSection 14A

…t dividend income, the provisions of section 14A of the Act cannot be applied. In the present case, no exempt income has been earned by the assessee during the relevant Assessment Year. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: • Cheminvest Ltd. Vs CIT: 378 ITR 33 (Delhi HC) • CIT vs Lakhani Marketing Inc.: 226 Taxman 45 (P&H HC) • CIT vs Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd.: 248 Taxman 55 (Madras HC) Accordingly, disallowance made by the assessing officer under the provisions of section 14A of the Act is unsustainable and calls for being deleted. 26. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order. 27. We have heard…

M/S. Moserbaer India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 2395/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblemoserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Astt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Moserbaer India Ltd. Circle 5(1) Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, New Delhi Phase-Iii New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) Aaam0322J (Respondent) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Dcit Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Circle 17(1) Phase-Iii New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Respondent) Aaam0322J (Appellant)

Section 10BSection 143Section 144CSection 14A

…t dividend income, the provisions of section 14A of the Act cannot be applied. In the present case, no exempt income has been earned by the assessee during the relevant Assessment Year. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: • Cheminvest Ltd. Vs CIT: 378 ITR 33 (Delhi HC) • CIT vs Lakhani Marketing Inc.: 226 Taxman 45 (P&H HC) • CIT vs Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd.: 248 Taxman 55 (Madras HC) Accordingly, disallowance made by the assessing officer under the provisions of section 14A of the Act is unsustainable and calls for being deleted. 26. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order. 27. We have heard…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Moser Baer India Limited, New Delhi

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1200/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Oct 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Ms Suchitra Kamblemoserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Assistant Commissioner Of Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Income Tax Phase-Iii Circle 5(1) New Delhi-110020 New Delhi Aaam0322J (Respondent) (Appellant) Astt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs Moserbaer India Ltd. Circle 5(1) Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, New Delhi Phase-Iii New Delhi-110020 (Appellant) Aaam0322J (Respondent) Moserbaer India Ltd. Vs Dcit Tax, 43-A, Okhla Indl Area, Circle 17(1) Phase-Iii New Delhi New Delhi-110020 (Respondent) Aaam0322J (Appellant)

Section 10BSection 143Section 144CSection 14A

…t dividend income, the provisions of section 14A of the Act cannot be applied. In the present case, no exempt income has been earned by the assessee during the relevant Assessment Year. The Ld. AR relied upon the following decisions: • Cheminvest Ltd. Vs CIT: 378 ITR 33 (Delhi HC) • CIT vs Lakhani Marketing Inc.: 226 Taxman 45 (P&H HC) • CIT vs Chettinad Logistics (P.) Ltd.: 248 Taxman 55 (Madras HC) Accordingly, disallowance made by the assessing officer under the provisions of section 14A of the Act is unsustainable and calls for being deleted. 26. The Ld. DR relied upon the Assessment Order. 27. We have heard…