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

DCIT 2(1)(1), Mumbai vs. Godavari Biorefineries Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 3493/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh() & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 35

…essee that disallowance contemplated u/s 14A in any way cannot swallow the entire exempt income of the assessee and this legal position is reiterated by various High Courts, including the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vs CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) wherein it was held that disallowance contemplated u/s 14A cannot exceed exempt income. 12. We have heard both the parties and considered material on record. There is no dispute with regard to applicability of provisions of section 14A r.w.r. 8D of I.T. Rules, 1962. The assessee has made suo moto disallowance of Rs.10,000 considering th…

Rose Financiers & Commercials Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(4), Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 753/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.S.Saini, Am ] Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri M.Satnaliwala, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sanjoy Mukherjee, Addl. CIT
Section 14A

…ake the disallowance as made by him in the assessment order. 7. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the lower authorities and materials available on record. I find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd v CIT 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) held as follows :- “15. Turning to the central question that arises for consideration, the Court finds that the complete answer is provided by the decision of this Court in CIT v. Holcim India (P) Ltd. (decision dated 5th September 2014 in ITA No. 486/2014). In that case a similar question arose, viz., whether the ITAT was justified in del…

Inductis India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal filed by assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 1438/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri P.M.Jagtap & Smt. Beena A Pillaiay: 2011-12 Inductis India Pvt.Ltd. Vs. Dy.Cit, Circle 12(1) 414, 4Th Floor, Dlf Jasola New Delhi Tower B Plot No. 10 & 11, Dda District Centre, Jasola New Delhi 110 044 Pan: Aaac18497C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Sh. Vishal Kalra, Adv. Sh. S.S.Tomar, Adv. Department By : Sh. Hk Chaudhary, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 18.04.2018 Date Of Pronouncement: 13.07.2018

For Appellant: Sh. Vishal Kalra, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. HK Chaudhary, CIT-DR
Section 143Section 92D

…r income assessee has earned merely dividend from mutual fund investments which is not traded for the year under consideration. Ld. counsel placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT reported in (2015) 61 Taxmann.com 118, wherein it has been held that: 23. In the context of the facts enumerated hereinbefore the Court answers the question framed by holding that the expression 'does not form part of the total income' in Section 14A of the envisages that there should be an actual receipt of income, which is not includible in the total income, during the relev…

Balvir Singh Sekhon, Ludhiana vs. Addl. CIT, R-VII, Ludhiana

In the result the appeal of the assessee is treated as

ITA 1229/CHANDI/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh10 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri B.R.R. Kumarbalvir Singh Sekhon, Vs. The Addl. Cit, B-Xx-1881, St.No.5, Range Vii, Maharaj Nagar, Ludhiana. Ludhiana. Pan: Advps6951J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Sarabjit Garg, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Meenakshi Vohra, Sr.DR
Section 14ASection 250

…ictional High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the cases of ‘CIT Faridabad Vs. Lakhani Marketing Inc.’ 226 Taxman 45 (P&H) and ‘CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles’ (2009) 319 ITR 204 (P&H), of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of ‘Cheminvest Ltd Vs. ITO’ (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) and of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of ‘Corrtech Energy P. Ltd. (2014) 45 Taxman.com 116’ and further of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd’ (2014) 272 CTR (All) 277 and various other case laws. In all the above referred to case laws, the Hon'ble High Courts have been unanimo…

M/S Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 665/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2018AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jhanwar (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai (DCIT)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e has relied upon the decisions of Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in case of Principal CIT vs. State Bank of Patiala, 78 taxmann.com 3, CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd., 189 Taxman 50 and decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Delhi). 4.1. On the other hand, the ld. D/R has submitted that the AO has given a finding that the assessee has earned exempt income during the year under consideration. She has relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 5. We have considered the rival submissions as well as the relevant material on record. We note that the only investm…

Karamtara Steel Private Limited (Merged With Karamtara Engineering Private Limitate), Mumbai vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax Ward 10(1)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed as above

ITA 4288/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.K.PatelFor Respondent: Shri M.C.Omi Nigshen
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…the effect that since assessee has not received any exempt income during the year under consideration, no disallowance under section 14A of the Act was called for in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT, 378 ITR 33 (Del). It has been pointed out that the only investment made by the assessee was in the shares of its subsidiary company and during the year no dividend income was received. In order to complete the factual matrix, it has also been pointed out that w.e.f. 01/04/2012 the assessee company as well as its subsidiary investee company have merged with o…

ACIT, Sangrur vs. M/S Lotus Processors Pvt. Ltd., Barnala

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 6/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Membe & Ms. Annapurna Gupta, Accountantmember Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Sh. Manoj Kumar, Sr.DRFor Respondent: S/Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CA
Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…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 ITA No. 6/Chd/2017- Lotus Processors Pvt Ltd, Barnala 3 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 the Act in cas…

Ferari Investments & Trading Co.P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 5(1)(4), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is party allowed

ITA 357/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri G Manjunatha, Am

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay R Parikh, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “F” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स िंह, न्याययक दस्य एविं श्री जी. मंजुनाथ लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI G MANJUNATHA, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 357/Mum/2017 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2012-13) M/s Feerari Investments & Income Tax Officer-5(1)(4), Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd Room No. 569, Aayakar C/0, Inquilab Offset Printers Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Ltd., 156-D, J. Dadajee Mumbai-400 020 Vs. Round, Behind Everest Building, Tardeo, Mumbai-400 034 .. (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent) स्थायी…

M/S. Royal Crystal Dealers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 4(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 238/KOL/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata27 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am] I.T.A No. 238/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2009-10 M/S Royal Crystal Dealers Pvt. Ltd. -Vs- Ito, Ward-4(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aadcc 0441 K ] (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri M.D. Shah, ARFor Respondent: Smt. Ranu Biswas, Addl. CIT
Section 14ASection 250

…e Act read with Rule 8Dof the Income Tax Rule, 1962 (‘Rule’). The assessee claims that it had not received any dividend during the year. Thus, no disallowance can be made u/s 14A of the Act as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chem Invest in 378 ITR 33 (Del). This appeal is restored to the file of the AO for verification of this claim that the assessee has not received any dividend and if it is true, no disallowance should be made u/s 14A of the Act. 2 M/s Royal Crystals Dealers Pvt. Ltd. A.Yr.2009-10 3. In view of the above, this appeal is set aside to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh adjudic…

ACIT 3(1)(2), Mumbai vs. Edelweiss Alternative Asset Advisors Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 804/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, C.AFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 14A

…. 14A is attracted. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of CIT v. Delite Enterprises in ITA.No. 110 of 2009 dated 26.02.2009 and the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited v. CIT [378 ITR 33]. 4. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. It is an undisputed fact that during this Assessment Year assessee did not receive any exempt income. When no exempt income is received by the assessee, whether there can be any disallowance u…

DCIT Cir 6(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Indrajit Power Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue and the Cross

ITA 389/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. A.L. Saini, Hon’Bledcit, Circle-6(3)(1), Vs. M/S. Indrajit Power Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai. Uttam House, 69, P.D. Mello Road, Carnac Bunder, Mumbai Pan No. Aaaci 8656 B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivaram, Sr.Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Virendra Singh – DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…d until there is a receipt of exempt income for the assessment year under consideration, and for that, we rely on the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court C.O.No. 168/MUM/2018 (M/s. Indrajit Power Pvt. Ltd. ) in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi-HC), wherein it was held that no disallowance under section 14A can be made in a year in which no exempt income had been earned or received by the assessee. The expression ‘does not from part of total income’ in section 14A envisages that there should be an actual receipt of income, which was not includible in the total income, during the r…

Mangal Keshav Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 4(3)(2), Mumbai

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

ITA 209/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Dr. A.L. Saini, Hon’Blemangal Keshav Securities Ltd., Vs. Dcit-4(3)(2), (Erstwhile Known As Mangal Mumbai. Keshav Holdings Ltd.) 501, Heritage Plaza, J.P. Road, Opp. Indian Oil Colony, Andheri (W), Mumbai. Pan No. Aaecm 6524 C (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri N.R. Agarwal–CAFor Respondent: Shri Saurabhkumar Rai – DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI “I” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI Dr. A.L. SAINI, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mangal Keshav Securities Ltd., vs. DCIT-4(3)(2), (Erstwhile known as Mangal Mumbai. Keshav Holdings Ltd.) 501, Heritage Plaza, J.P. Road, Opp. Indian Oil Colony, Andheri (W), Mumbai. PAN No. AAECM 6524 C (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri N.R. Agarwal–CA. Department By : Shri Saurabhkumar Rai – DR Date of hearing : 18/06/2018. Date of pronouncement : 27/06/2018. O R D E R PERDr.A.L. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER By way of this appeal, the assessee a…

Times Infotainment Media Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 1(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 564/MUM/2016[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Hon'Ble & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Hon'Ble

For Appellant: Shri S. Venkataraman, C.AFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin
Section 14A

…nfotainment Media Ltd., income and in the absence of any exempt income received by the assessee no disallowance u/s. 14A is attracted. Reliance is placed on the decision of the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited v. CIT [378 ITR 33]. 4. Ld. DR vehemently supported the orders of the Assessing Officer. 5. We have heard the rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below. It is an undisputed fact that during this Assessment Year assessee did not receive any exempt income. When no exempt income is received by the assessee, whether there can be any disallowance u…

Grover Vineyards Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO WD 1(1)(4), Mumbai

Appeal are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3509/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 Income Tax Officer Ward M/S Grover Vineyards 1(1)(4),531 A/579 Pvt. Ltd., 107/8, 1St Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Floor, Arcadia, N.C.P.A. M.K.Road Lane, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400021. Pan No. Aaacg3592Q Appellant Respondent Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Grover Vineyards Income Tax Officer Ltd. Anand Bhavan, 348, Ward 1(1)(4) Vs. Dr. D.N. Road, Fort, Mumbai. Mumbai-400001 Pan No. Aaacg3592Q Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. L. Raghavendra Rao, ARFor Respondent: Ms. S. Padmaja, CIT(DR)
Section 133(6)Section 143(3)

…After considering the disallowance of gross interest already made, the AO restricted the disallowance to Rs.65,000/- u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D. M/s Grover Vineyards In CIT v. Lakhani Marketing Inc. (2014) 49 taxmann.com 257 (P&H) and Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del), it is held that unless and until, there is receipt of exempted income for the concerned assessment years (dividend from shares), section 14A of the Act cannot be invoked. Such being the position, we delete the disallowance of Rs.65,000/-. Thus the 4th and 5th ground of appeal are allowed. 18. Thus the appeal filed by the assessee is partly…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Shourya Towers Pvt. Ltd., Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 6485/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishinitishree Infrastructure Ltd, Vs. Dcit, (Presently Known As Shourya Central Circle-21, Towers Pvt. Ltd), New Delhi C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Aahcs9332F (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Nitishree Infrastructure Ltd, Central Circle-21, (Presently Known As New Delhi Shourya Towers Pvt. Ltd), C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Aahcs9332F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 36

…ch is chargeable to tax. The other miscellaneous income of Rs. 18833/- is not exempt. He therefore, submitted that in absence of any exempt income no disallowance can be made. He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd Vs. CIT 322 ITR 33. 14. The ld DR relied upon the order of the ld AO. 15. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and also found substantial force in the argument of the ld AR that if there is no exempt income earned by the assessee then no disallowance can be made u/s 14A of the Act. The decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court also supports the view of…

M/S. Nitishree Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5720/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishinitishree Infrastructure Ltd, Vs. Dcit, (Presently Known As Shourya Central Circle-21, Towers Pvt. Ltd), New Delhi C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Aahcs9332F (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Nitishree Infrastructure Ltd, Central Circle-21, (Presently Known As New Delhi Shourya Towers Pvt. Ltd), C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Aahcs9332F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 36

…ch is chargeable to tax. The other miscellaneous income of Rs. 18833/- is not exempt. He therefore, submitted that in absence of any exempt income no disallowance can be made. He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd Vs. CIT 322 ITR 33. 14. The ld DR relied upon the order of the ld AO. 15. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and also found substantial force in the argument of the ld AR that if there is no exempt income earned by the assessee then no disallowance can be made u/s 14A of the Act. The decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court also supports the view of…

M/S. T.G. Leisure & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3863/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishii. T. Appeal Nos. 3844 & 6138 (Del) Of 2014 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12. Deputy Commissioner M/S. T.G. Leisure & Of Income Tax, Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Circle : 16 (1), Khasra No. 646–653, Main N E W D E L H I. Chattarpur Mandir Road, Chhatarpur, New Delhi – 30. Pan : Aabct 2479 E

For Appellant: Shri Deependra Mohan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. D. R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…y. Despite the above facts, the learned Assessing Officer applied Rule 8-D of the Income Tax Act and made the disallowance accordingly. The learned CIT (Appeals) also disallowed part of the sum. However, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 (Del.) has held that in absence of any exempt income no disallowance under section 14A can be made. 9. The learned Departmental Representative could not controvert the submission of the assessee that it has not received any exempt income. In view of this, respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, we direct the learned Asses…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. T.G. Leisure & Resorts Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3844/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishii. T. Appeal Nos. 3844 & 6138 (Del) Of 2014 Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2011-12. Deputy Commissioner M/S. T.G. Leisure & Of Income Tax, Resorts Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Circle : 16 (1), Khasra No. 646–653, Main N E W D E L H I. Chattarpur Mandir Road, Chhatarpur, New Delhi – 30. Pan : Aabct 2479 E

For Appellant: Shri Deependra Mohan, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. D. R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…y. Despite the above facts, the learned Assessing Officer applied Rule 8-D of the Income Tax Act and made the disallowance accordingly. The learned CIT (Appeals) also disallowed part of the sum. However, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT 378 ITR 33 (Del.) has held that in absence of any exempt income no disallowance under section 14A can be made. 9. The learned Departmental Representative could not controvert the submission of the assessee that it has not received any exempt income. In view of this, respectfully following the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court, we direct the learned Asses…

Taneja Developers and Infrastructure (Panipat) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed and appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2178/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Jun 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishinitishree Infrastructure Ltd, Vs. Dcit, (Presently Known As Shourya Central Circle-21, Towers Pvt. Ltd), New Delhi C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Aahcs9332F (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Nitishree Infrastructure Ltd, Central Circle-21, (Presently Known As New Delhi Shourya Towers Pvt. Ltd), C/O Rra Taxindia, D-28, South Extension, Part-I, New Delhi Pan: Aahcs9332F (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 36

…ch is chargeable to tax. The other miscellaneous income of Rs. 18833/- is not exempt. He therefore, submitted that in absence of any exempt income no disallowance can be made. He relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Cheminvest Ltd Vs. CIT 322 ITR 33. 14. The ld DR relied upon the order of the ld AO. 15. We have carefully considered the rival contentions and also found substantial force in the argument of the ld AR that if there is no exempt income earned by the assessee then no disallowance can be made u/s 14A of the Act. The decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court also supports the view of…

M/S Chandigarh Distillers & Bottlers Pvt. Ltd., Chandigarh vs. DCIT, Ludhiana

In the result both the appeals of the assessee are hereby

ITA 778/CHANDI/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh20 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms.Annapurna Gupta

For Appellant: Shri Sudhir Sehgal, AdvFor Respondent: Smt.Chanderkanta, Addl.CIT
Section 14ASection 250

…High Court of Punjab and Haryana in the case of CIT, Faridabad Vs. Lakhani Marketing Inc.’, 226 Taxman 45 (P&H) and in the case of ‘CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles’ (2009) 319 ITR 204 (P&H), Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of ‘Cheminvest Ltd Vs. ITO’ (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) and of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of ‘Corrtech Energy P. Ltd. (2014) 45 Taxman.com 116’ and further of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd’ (2014) 272 CTR (All) 277 and various other case laws. In all the above referred to case laws, the Hon'ble High Courts have been unanim…