How many judgments cite Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT?

1,569 judgments on BharatTax cite Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (378 ITR 33), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 8D, Section 115JB, Section 250, Section 1961.

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 367,194 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 14A Section 143(3)Section 8D Section 115JB Section 250 Section 1961 Section 37(1)Section 143(2)

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

disallowance u/s 14a disallowance under section 14a section 14a section 36(1)(iii)section 115jb revenue expenditure section 37(1)section 37 section 36 previous year scrutiny assessment section 115

Judgments citing Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT

Indo Hongkong Industries Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2612/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CA &For Respondent: Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 14A

…extent. 11. We have heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record. It is found that the assessee earned dividend income of Rs.15,245/-, which was claimed as exempt. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) has held that if there is u/s 14A of the Act. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. (2014) 90CCH 081-Del-HC. The net effect of these decisions is that the disallowance u/s 14A gets restricted to the extent of exempt income, even if the provisions of the section are attracted. In view o…

Indo Hongkong Industries Pvt. Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2611/DEL/2015[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jain, CA &For Respondent: Shri F.R. Meena, Sr. DR

Section 14A

First Winner Industries Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 9(1), Mumbai

In the result, these appeals by the assessee stand allowed

ITA 5730/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Sept 2018AY 2011-12

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

For Appellant: Shri Nikhil BajajFor Respondent: Shri V. Jenardhanan

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, AM AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI, JM I.T.A. No.5730/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s. First Winner Industries Ltd. Add. CIT, Range 9(1), 605, Business Classic, Mumbai Vs. Chincholi Bunder Road, Malad (W), Mumbai-64 PAN/GIR No. AAACF 7079 H (Appellant) (Respondent) : & I.T.A. No. 5731/Mum/2016 (Assessment Year: 2011-12) M/s. First Winner Lifestyle Ltd. Add. CIT, Range 9(1), 605, Business Classic, Mumbai Vs. Chincholi Bunder Road, Malad (W), Mumbai-64 PAN/GIR No. AACCR 3942 F (Appellant) : (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Nikhil Bajaj…

DCIT, C-4, Ludhiana vs. M/S Aarti Steels Limited, Ludhiana

ITA 633/CHANDI/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Sept 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash AgarwalFor Respondent: Smt. Chandrakanta

Section 14A

…ions of the High Courts including that of Jurisdictional Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Faridabad v. Lakhani Marketing INC 226 Taxmann 45 (P&H) and also by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) and further of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 277 (All). In view of this we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. There is no merit in the appeal of the Revenue and the same is accordingly dismissed. Order dictated and pronounced in the open…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax vs. M/S. R.L. Gold Pvt. Ltd., Jalgaon

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1069/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Dr. Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha

Section 14ASection 40A(2)(a)

…isallowance under 6 ITA Nos. 1001 & 1069/PUN/2015, A.Y. 2010-11 the provisions of section 14A r.w. Rule 8D is warranted. In support of his submissions, the ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions : i. Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 378 ITR 33 (Delhi); ii. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Corrtech Energy P. Ltd., 372 ITR 97 (Guj); iii. Redington (India) Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, 392 ITR 633 (Mad); iv. Shri Goyal Ishwarchand Kishorilal Vs. JCIT in ITA No. 422/PN/2013 for assessment year 2009-10 decided on 26-06-2014. 5. On the other hand Shri Mukesh Jha representing t…

R.L. Gold Pvt. Ltd vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1001/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Dr. Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha

Section 14ASection 40A(2)(a)

M/S. Rajmal Lakhichand and Sons vs. Joint Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1000/PUN/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm

For Appellant: Dr. Sunil PathakFor Respondent: Shri Mukesh Jha

Section 14ASection 40A(2)(a)

…y the assessee form the above investments, no disallowance under the provisions of section 14A r.w. Rule 8D is warranted. In support of his submissions, the ld. AR placed reliance on the following decisions : i. Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 378 ITR 33 (Delhi); ii. Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Corrtech Energy P. Ltd., 372 ITR 97 (Guj); iii. Redington (India) Ltd. Vs. Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, 392 ITR 633 (Mad); iv. Shri Goyal Ishwarchand Kishorilal Vs. JCIT in ITA No. 422/PN/2013 for assessment year 2009-10 decided on 26-06-2014. 4.6 The ld. AR submitted that in ground No. 3 of th…

Goldman Sachs Asset Management (India) P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1427/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh: A.Y : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Madhur AgrawalFor Respondent: Shri Jayant Kumar

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)

…other issue in this appeal is with regard to disallowance of Rs.30,09,500/- made u/s 14A of the Act. 19. On this aspect, the short point pleaded by the assessee was based on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Del). As per the learned representative, in the absence of any receipt of exempt dividend income during the year under consideration, the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is not merited. The aforesaid proposition of the assessee is fully supported by the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (supra). Insofar as th…

Sanjeev Kumar Kapoor, Rajgangpur vs. JCIT, Rourkela Range, Rourkela

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR

Section 10(34)Section 14A

…supported the orders of lower authorities. 12. 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 p…

T.R.Chemicals Ltd., Rajgangpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Rourkela

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 504/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR

Section 10(34)Section 14A

Finquest Securities P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2540/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalm/S. Finquest Securities Pvt. Ltd., 602, 6Th Floor,Boston House Suren Road, Andheri (E) ……………. Appellant Mumbai – 400 093 Pan No. Aabcb7028F V/S Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax (2)(1)(2), 575, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, ……………. Respondent M.K.Road, New Marine Lines Mumbai – 400 020

For Appellant: S/Shri V.G.Ginde & Kumar KaleFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Gubgotra

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M/s. Finquest Securities Pvt. Ltd., 602, 6th Floor,Boston House Suren Road, Andheri (E) ……………. Appellant Mumbai – 400 093 PAN no. AABCB7028F v/s Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (2)(1)(2), 575, 5th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, ……………. Respondent M.K.Road, New Marine Lines Mumbai – 400 020 Assessee by : S/Shri V.G.Ginde & Kumar Kale Revenue by : Shri Rajeev Gubgotra Date of Hearing – 06/08/2018 Date of Order – 23.08.2018 O R D E R PER SAKTIJIT DEY, J.M. This is an appea…

Asst CIT 6(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Essar Infrastructjure Services Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2011-2012

ITA 4018/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Asst. Cit 6(2)(2), M/S Essar Infrastructure – Room No. 563, Services Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Essar House, 11, K.K. Marg, Churchgate, Vs. Mahalaxmi, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400034 Pan: Aabce3527C (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (Dr) Assessee By : Shri Vijay Mehta & Shri Anuj Kisnadwala (Ar) Date Of Hearing: 25/05/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 23/08/2018

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta &For Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav (DR)

Section 143Section 14ASection 32Section 32(2)

…m Motors (P) Ltd. ( 55.taxmann.com 262). Thus the addition is liable to deleted.” 7. We notice that the Ld. CIT (A) has deleted the addition by following the judgments of Hon’ble High Courts referred above. Further in the cases of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT –IV 378 ITR 33 (Del), the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held that section 14A does not apply where no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year. In the present case, since the assessee has not received any exempt income during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration, no question of disallowance does ar…

M/S Braza Tyres (P) Ltd., Paonta Sahib vs. DCIT, Circle, Shimla

Appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1417/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Surinder Meena, JCIT

Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

…sue is now squarely covered by the following decisions of the different High Courts in favour of the assessee. 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 ITA Nos. 1417 & 1416/Chd/2016- M/s Braza Types Pvt Ltd & Chiq Mircron…

M/S Chinq Micron Chem (P) Ltd., Paonta Sahib vs. DCIT, Circle, Shimla

Appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1416/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Harry Rikhy, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Surinder Meena, JCIT

Section 14ASection 36Section 80I

DCIT Cir 7(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Patliputra Highway Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2270/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2270/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13)

For Appellant: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, DRFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…mbay High Court, Nagpur Bench in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Ballarpur Industries Limited in Income Tax Appeal No. 51 of 2016 has considered this issue 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…

DCIT Cir 7(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Purple Medical Solutions P. Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2101/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri N.K. Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 2101/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2013-14)

For Appellant: Shri Abi Rama Karthikeyan, DRFor Respondent: Shri Nimesh Chotani, AR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Court, Nagpur Bench in the case of Pr. CIT vs. Ballarpur Industries Limited in Income Tax Appeal No. 51 of 2016, wherein this issue has 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…

ACIT 9(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Gini & Jony Ltd, Mumbai

In the result , appeal of the Revenue in ITA no

ITA 1892/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.1892 & 1893/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2009-10 & 2012-13) बिाम/ Acit 9(3)(2) M/S. Gini & Jony Ltd. 418, 4Th Floor, A-601, Citi Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Andheri Kurla Road, V. Mumbai-400020 Andheri (E), Mumbai-400059, स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacg1295N (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri. Gaurav KabraFor Respondent: Shri A.M. Mittal, CIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14ASection 37

…ear and hence no disallowance of the expenditure can be made u/s. 14A of the 1961 Act. The learned counsel relied upon decision of Hon‘ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT in ITA 749/2014 vide judgment dated 02.09.2015 reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33(Del.) and decision of Hon‘ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Private Ltd. v. CIT in ITA no. 117 of 2015 vide judgment dated 25.02.2015 reported in (2015) 372 ITR 694(Del.). 12. We have considered rival contentions and perused the material on record including cited case laws. We have observed that the assessee had made investment…

DCIT 10(2)(2), Mumbai vs. Mirc Electronics Private Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3845/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3845 & 3846/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बिाम/ Dcit-10(2)(2) Mirc Electronics Room No. 216-A, 2Nd Floor Limited, G-1, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road Onida House, V. Mumbai-400020 Mahakali Caves Road, Midc, Mumbai-400093 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacm8055A (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri. Satish Chandra Rajore Assessee By : Shri Dharmendra Singh सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 10.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 10.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Two Appeals, Filed By Revenue, Being Ita No. 3845 & 3846/Mum/2018 For Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively , Are Directed Against Separate Appellate Order(S) Both Dated 27.03.2018 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2013-14 & 2014-15 Respectively , The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Separate Assessment Order(S) Dated 28.03.2016 & 29.12.2016 Respectively Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act

For Appellant: Shri Dharmendra SinghFor Respondent: Shri. Satish Chandra Rajore

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.3845 & 3846/Mum/2018 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14 & 2014-15) बिाम/ DCIT-10(2)(2) MIRC Electronics Room No. 216-A, 2nd Floor Limited, G-1, Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road Onida House, v. Mumbai-400020 Mahakali Caves Road, MIDC, Mumbai-400093 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AAACM8055A (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri. Satish Chandra Rajore Assessee by : Shri Dharmendra Singh सुनव…

DCIT Cir. 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. L & T Power Development Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 874/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.874/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Dcit Cit 2(2)(1) बिाम/ L&T Power Development Room No. 545, 5 Th Floor, Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, L&T House, N.M. Road, V. M.K Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400038 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcl3867C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri. Nishant Samaiya, Dr Assessee By : Shri Govind Jhaveri सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kocharthis Appeal, Filed By The Revenue, Being Ita No. 874/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 09.11.2016 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2013-14, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 30.11.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A. No.874/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri Govind JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri. Nishant Samaiya, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण “A” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI JOGINDER SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.874/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) DCIT CIT 2(2)(1) बिाम/ L&T Power Development Room No. 545, 5 th floor, Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, L&T House, N.M. Road, v. M.K Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400038 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PAN : AABCL3867C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue by: Shri. Nishant Samaiya, DR Assessee by : Shri Govind Jhaveri सुनवाई की तारीख /Date of He…

Kanyakumari Builders P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT CC 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 498/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Hon'Blem/S. Kanyakumari Builders Pvt. Ltd., V. Dcit Central Circle – 4(2) Raheja Chamber, Linking Road, Mumbai Main Avenue, 23-25 M.G. Road, Santacruze (W). Mumbai -400 054

For Appellant: Shri Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Shri Abiram Kartikeyan

Section 14A

…ing decisions in support of his contention: - a. CIT v. M/s Delite Industries Ltd. [ ITA.No.110 of 2009 (Bom.)] b. CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [372ITR 97 (Gujarat)] c. CIT v. M/S. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. [230 TAXMAN 0063 (All.)] Cheminvest Limited v. CIT [378 ITR 33 (Delhi)] d. e. CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. [319 ITR 204 (P&H)] f. M/s. Siva Industries & Holdings Ltd. v. ACIT [145 TTJ (Chennai) 530] 3. Ld. Counsel for the assessee invited our attention to Para No.5 of the Assessment Order and submitted that assessee furnished letter dated 11.01.2016 stating that it had not received any exempt income…