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 367,181 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

Weizmann Forex Limited (Previously Known As Chanakya Holding Limited), Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Range-1(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-

ITA 4434/MUM/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S Weizmann Forex Ltd. The Dy. Commissioner Of (Previously Known As Chanakya Income Tax, Holding Ltd.D) Range-1(3)(2), Empire House, 214, Vs. Room No. 564, Dr. D.N. Road, Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Road, Ent. A.K. Nayak Marg, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai - 400001 Pan: Aabcc7143A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Anujkisnadwala (Ca) Revenue By : Shri V. Vidhyadhar (Dr) Date Of Hearing: 16/07/2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 10/08/2018

For Appellant: Shri AnujKisnadwala (CA)For Respondent: Shri V. Vidhyadhar (DR)
Section 115JSection 14Section 143Section 143(2)Section 14A

…d. counsel further submitted that this issue is covered by the judgment of the Nagpur Bench of the Hon’ble Bombay High Court PCIT Nagpur vs. M/s Ballarpur Industries Ltd., Income Tax Appeal No. 51 of 2016 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd vs. CIT 281 CTR 447 (Del.). Since, the impugned order is not in accordance with the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, the same is liable to be set aside. 6. On the other hand the Ld. departmental representative relied on the findings of the authorities below. 7. We have gone through the orders passed by the authorities below in the light of t…

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 304/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 254

…A is called for in case no income has been earned by the assessee during the year under question:- No. Case Law Judicial Authority Citation 1. CIT Vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 111 DTR 158 2. Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT Hon’ble Delhi High Court 378 ITR 33 3. PCIT Vs IL&FS Energy Dev. Co. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 84 Taxmann.com 186 Ltd. 4. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 5. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 6. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 7. CIT Vs. Wins…

Sodexo Food Solutions India P.Ltd ( Formelry Knwona S Radhakrishna Hospialality Services P.Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7042/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 254

…A is called for in case no income has been earned by the assessee during the year under question:- No. Case Law Judicial Authority Citation 1. CIT Vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 111 DTR 158 2. Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT Hon’ble Delhi High Court 378 ITR 33 3. PCIT Vs IL&FS Energy Dev. Co. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 84 Taxmann.com 186 Ltd. 4. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 5. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 6. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 7. CIT Vs. Wins…

ACIT 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sodexo Food Solutions India P.Ltd ( Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Services P.Ltd)), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6864/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR
Section 143(3)Section 254

…A is called for in case no income has been earned by the assessee during the year under question:- No. Case Law Judicial Authority Citation 1. CIT Vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 111 DTR 158 2. Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT Hon’ble Delhi High Court 378 ITR 33 3. PCIT Vs IL&FS Energy Dev. Co. Hon’ble Delhi High Court 84 Taxmann.com 186 Ltd. 4. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 5. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 6. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 7. CIT Vs. Wins…

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Edel Commodities Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1643/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 1643/Mum/2017 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2012-13) Acit-3(1)(2), Edel Commodities Ltd. Room No. 607, 6Th Floor, 14Th Floor, Express Tower, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-20 Nariman Point, Mumbai-400 021 (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) .. (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा िं./Pan No. Aacce0323K

For Appellant: Shri DG Pansari, DRFor Respondent: Shri Ravikant Pathak, AR
Section 143(3)

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

Aditya Birla Retail Ltd, Mumbai vs. Pr CIT 9, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3215/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Aug 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

Section 143Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 253Section 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, MUMBAI, BEFORE SHRI B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3215/Mum/2015 Assessment Year 2010-11 बनाम बनाम/ बनाम बनाम Aditya Birla Retail Limited Pr. CIT-9; Room No. 214, 2nd Floor, (successors of M/s Vs. Trinethra Super Retail Pvt. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Ltd.) 86/92 Skyline Icon, Mumbai-20. 5th & 6th Floor, Near Mittal Indl. Estate, Andheri (E), Mumbai-400059. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN :AAACP2678Q (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. अपीलाथ" क" ओर से /Appellant by Shri Yogesh A. Thar (AR) ""यथ" क" ओर से/ Respondent by S…

Gujarat Fluorochemicals Limited, Vadodara vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 805/AHD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Aug 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.805/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 & Asst.Year : 2013-2014

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.805 and 2744/Ahd/2017 made reference to the decision of ITAT, Special Bench in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. ITO, 121 ITD 318 (Delhi)(SB). This decision has been reversed by the Hon’ble High Court and the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi Court reported in 378 ITR 33. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in this case has considered judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Correctch Energy P.Ltd.(supra). The issue before the Hon’ble High Court was, whether the disallowance under section 14A of the Act can be made in a year in which no exempt income has been earned or received by the assessee. In this way,…

Gujarat Flurochemicals Limited., Vadodara vs. The ACIT, Circle-1(1)(1), Vadodara

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

ITA 2744/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad03 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singhआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No.805/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Asstt. Year: 2012-2013 & Asst.Year : 2013-2014

For Appellant: Shri S.N. Soparkar and Shri Parin Shah, ARFor Respondent: Shri O.P. Vaishnav, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No.805 and 2744/Ahd/2017 made reference to the decision of ITAT, Special Bench in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. ITO, 121 ITD 318 (Delhi)(SB). This decision has been reversed by the Hon’ble High Court and the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi Court reported in 378 ITR 33. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in this case has considered judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Correctch Energy P.Ltd.(supra). The issue before the Hon’ble High Court was, whether the disallowance under section 14A of the Act can be made in a year in which no exempt income has been earned or received by the assessee. In this way,…

M/S. Indiabulls Capital Services Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1546/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri Joginder Singhassessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta &For Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…in the above hue and compute the same after allowing opportunity of being heard to the assessee. 11. It is noticed that the assessee earned exempt dividend income of Rs.3,38,62,672/-. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) and CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. (2014) 90CCH 081-Del-HC has held that if there is no exempt income, there can be no question of making any disallowance u/s 14A. A fortiori, the 9 disallowance u/s 14A of the Act has to be restricted to the amount of exempt income. As such, we direct that the disallowance computed by the Assessing Officer i…

ACIT, Circle-2 (1), Guntur vs. Sri Mahalakshmi Investments, Guntur

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 28/VIZ/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam31 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao, Hon’Ble & Shri D.S. Sunder Singh, Hon’Bleacit, Circle-2(1), Vs. M/S. Sri Mahalakshmi Guntur. Investments, D.No. 8-24-31, Mangalagiri Road, Guntur. Pan No. Abafs 4221 L (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri D.J.P. Anand – Sr.DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…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. Sri Mahalakshmi Guntur. Investments, D.No. 8-24-31, Mangalagiri Road, Guntur. PAN No. ABAFS 4221 L (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None. Department By : Shri D.J.P. Anand – Sr.DR Date of hearing : 10/07/2018. Date of pronouncement : 31/07/2018. O R D E R PER V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Guntur, dated 10/0…

DCIT - 9(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Atlanta Infra Assets Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals of assessee and Revenue are allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 4769/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ram Lal Negi, Jm Dy. Commisioner Of Income Vs. M/S. Atlanta Infra Assets Limited Tax – 9(1)(2) 101, Shree Amba Shanti Room No.260A, Chambers Mumbai Andheri Kurla Road Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059 Pan/Gir No. Aaccb7416Q Appellant) .. Respondent) Co No.19/Mum/2018 M/S. Atlanta Infra Assets Limited Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Income 101, Shree Amba Shanti Chambers Tax – 9(1)(2) Andheri Kurla Road Room No.260A, Andheri (E), Mumbai – 400 059 Mumbai Pan/Gir No. Aaccb7416Q Appellant) .. Respondent) Revenue By Shri H.N. Singh Assessee By Shri Vijay Mehta Date Of Hearing 13/06/2018 Date Of Pronouncement 30/07/2018

For Respondent: - i) "Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32

…e was in receipt of Rs.60,000/- as dividend from the Co-operative bank. In view of the judicial pronouncements laid down by the Jurisdictional High Court in case of Delite Enterprises ITA No.110 of 2009 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd., 281 CTR 447 disallowance u/s.14A should not exceed the exempt income. Accordingly, we hold that disallowance u/s.14A should not exceed the exempt income. The AO is directed to 21 M/s. Atlanta Infra Assets Ltd., verify as to whether Rs.60,000/- received by assessee as dividend from Co-operative Bank if liable to tax, thenno disallowance u/s.14A is to be made.…

M/S. Indian Armour Systems P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1220/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Senior DR
Section 10BSection 14ASection 250

…ore is in consideration before us. 9. We have heard the parties and examined the orders of authorities below. Issue under consideration relates to disallowance under section 14 A of the Act. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CHEMINVEST LTD. V. CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Del) considered the similar 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 exempt income i…

M/S. Indian Armour Systems P. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Faridabad

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 1219/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal & Shri N.K. Choudhry

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh Gupta, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Senior DR
Section 10BSection 14ASection 250

…ore is in consideration before us. 9. We have heard the parties and examined the orders of authorities below. Issue under consideration relates to disallowance under section 14 A of the Act. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CHEMINVEST LTD. V. CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Del) considered the similar 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 exempt income i…

Praveen Building Construction Company Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, Ward- 20(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 1223/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.S. Syalassessment Year : 2013-14 Praveen Building Construction Co. Pvt. Vs. Ito, Ltd., Ward-20(1), 110, Jindals, Babar Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan: Aaacp0641D (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Shailesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…on. 3. Having heard both the sides and perused the relevant material on record, it is observed from the assessment order that no exempt income was earned by the assessee during the year. The Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) and CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. (2014) 90CCH 081-Del-HC has held that if there is no exempt income, there can be no question of making any disallowance u/s 14A. In view of these precedents, which are squarely applicable to the facts of the instant case, I hold that the ld. CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the disallowance. We, there…

Crescent Trading P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 3(3), Mumbai

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 240/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.Manjunatha, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm M/S. Cresent Trading Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Commissioner Of Income-Tax Mandhana Manor, 45, Wing-‘C’, 3(3), Mumbai. बिधम/ Mogul Lane, Matunga Road Vs. (West), Mumbai 400 016. स्थामी रेखा सं./ जीआइआय सं./ Pan No. Aabcc6898A (अऩीराथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: S/Shri Farrok Irani & Mitesh Shah, A.RsFor Respondent: Shri. Rajat Mittal, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ITA No. 995/Mum/2018, dated : 08.05.2018) (Copy placed on record). The Ld. A.R taking support of the aforesaid order passed by the Tribunal, submitted that following the judgment of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) the disallowance under Sec. 14A was restricted to the amount of the exempt dividend income. Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (for short ‘D.R’) relied on the order of the CIT(A). 6. We have heard the authorized representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on r…

Lodha Builders Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT, Cir- 6(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 1572/MUM/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jul 2018AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Shri N.K. Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Shri Vijay Mehta-ARFor Respondent: Sh. N.S. Jangpangi CIT-DR
Section 139Section 14ASection 201Section 40

…rt of his submission, the Ld. Representative for the assessee relied upon the following :- 1. Pr.CIT vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd.(ITA No.51 of 2016 dated 13/10/1016 (BHC); 2. Redington India Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT(329 ITR 633)(Mad.); 3. Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (378 ITR 33)(Del.); 281 CTR 447 (Del.); 4. CIT vs. Shivam Motors (P.) Ltd. (272 CTR 277)(All.); 5. CIT vs. Cortech Energy (P) Ltd. (272 CTR 265)( Guj.); 6. CIT vs. Lakhani Marketing Incl. (271 CTR 265)(P&H); 7. CIT vs. Holcim India (P) Ltd. (272 CTR 282) (Del.); 8. CIT vs. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. (319 ITR 204)(P&H); 9. CIT vs. Delite Enterprises (ITA…

Pr Commissioner of Income Tax-11 vs. Shri Braham Dev Gupta

The appeals are allowed

ITA/907/2017HC Delhi20 Jul 2018

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

Section 263

…in any manner affect the assessee’s tax liability in any manner. Lastly on disallowance under Section 14A of the Act, ITAT held that the assessee claimed that there was no exempt income and quoted the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax 378 ITR 33. The CIT has directed the AO to examine the issue in the light of the case law, instead of examining the issue in the light of settled principle of law. Therefore, the ITAT disagreed with the CIT that that no enquiry had been conducted by the AO. On inquiry with respect to Mr. Sahdev Gupta, the ITAT observed that the assessee had no trading t…

M/S Ufo Moviez India Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result this ground is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1271/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi19 Jul 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Rs Syal & Smt. Beena A Pillaia.Y. 2010-11

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37(1)

…upon the Schedule 14, forming part of P&L a/c for year under consideration, wherein dividend on current investment is shown at ‘nil’. He thus placing reliance upon decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33, submitted ITA 1271/Del/2015 A.Y.: 2010-11 UFO Moviez India Ltd. vs. DCIT that there cannot be any disallowance since assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration. 5. Ld.CIT,DR placed reliance upon the order of Ld.AO. 6. We have perused the submissions advanced by both the sides in the light of the records placed…

DCIT, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Mercury Projects Private Limited, Hyderabad

ITA 450/HYD/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmandy. Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Mercury Projects Income Tax, Circle 16(2) Private Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcm9019R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P. Murali Mohan RaoFor Respondent: Smt. N. Swapna, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 35D

…ove. 4. As far as Ground No.1 is concerned, though the learned DR supported the order of the AO, it is seen that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vs. CIT reported in 378 ITR 33 (Del.) wherein it has been held that if there Page 3 of 8 ITA No 450 of 2017 Mercury Projects P Ltd Hyderabad. is no dividend income (which is exempt from tax) earned during the relevant period, no disallowance u/s 14A can be made. Respectfully following the same, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT (A) who has followed the…

ACIT, Circle-16(1), Hyd, Hyderabad vs. Lanco Thermal Power Limited, Hyderabad

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue as well as C

ITA 1610/HYD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad18 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B. Ramakotaiah & Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Date of hearingFor Respondent: Smt. A. Rajvanshi Jain, DR
Section 14A

…o exempt income received by the assessee. In the case of Prathistha Industries Ltd., (supra) the Coordinate Bench deleted the disallowance u/s 14A of the IT Act following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., reported in 378 ITR 33, wherein it has been held that if there is no dividend / exempt income received by the assessee during the assessment year no disallowance is required to be made. Respectfully following the said decision we uphold the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and rejects the grounds raised by the Revenue. 6. The cross objection filed by the assessee becomes infruc…