Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO

121 ITD 318Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#228 most cited

What is Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO authority for?

Disallowance of expenses under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act can be made even when no exempt income has been earned or received by the assessee.

338

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO · Section 14A · disallowance of expenses · exempt income · no exempt income earned · Section 115JB · expenditure for exempt income · ITAT Special Bench · Delhi Tribunal · 121 ITD 318

Also reported as

317 ITR 86124 TTJ 577

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 115JBSection 1962Section 143(2)Section 1961Section 250

Issues it is cited on

disallowance u/s 14asection 14adisallowance under section 14asection 115jbprevious yearcompanytransfersection 14indiabusinesstotal incomesection 143

Judgments citing Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO

MUMBAI INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 2(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes, whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6692/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Mar 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Makarand V Mahadeokara.Y:2014-15 Mumbai International Vs. Dcit, Circle – 2(2)(1) Airport Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road 1St Floor, Terminal-1B, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – Chhatrpati Shivaji 400020. International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400099. Pan/Gir No. Aaecm6285C (Applicant) (Respondent) A.Y:2014-15 Dcit, Circle – 2(2)(1) Vs. Mumbai International Aayakar Bhavan, Mk Road Airport Ltd., New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 1St Floor, Terminal-1B, 400020. Chhatrpati Shivaji International Airport, Santacruz (E), Mumbai – 400099. Pan/Gir No. Aaecm6285C (Applicant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Saurabha Soparkar Virtually Appeared Revenue By Shri Annavaram Kosuri, Sr. Ar Date Of Hearing 25.02.2026 Date Of Pronouncement 09.03.2026 आदेश / Order Per Makarand V Mahadeokar, Am: These Cross Appeals Are Directed Against The Order Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) Under Section 250 Of The Mumbai International Airport Ltd., Mumbai Income-Tax Act, 1961 Dated 05.08.2025 In The Case Of The Assessee For Assessment Year 2014–15. The Assessment In The Present Case Was Originally Completed By The Assessing Officer Under Section 143(3) Of The Act Vide Order Dated 30.12.2017. Since The Issues Involved In The Appeals Of The Revenue As Well As The Assessee Arise Out Of The Same Appellate Order Of The Ld. Cit(A), These Appeals Were Heard Together & Are Being Disposed Of By Way Of This Common Order For The Sake Of Convenience & Brevity.

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 28Section 32(1)(ii)Section 35D

…isallowance was warranted. 36. The Assessing Officer, however, did not accept the explanation of the assessee. Placing reliance on CBDT Circular No. 5/2014 dated 11.02.2014 and the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (121 ITD 318), the Assessing Officer invoked the provisions of section 14A read with Rule 8D and computed disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) at 0.5% of the average value of investments, resulting in disallowance of Rs. 41,51,500/-. Mumbai International Airport Ltd., Mumbai 37. Aggrieved by the said action, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THIRUVALLUVAR TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED, NAMAKKAL

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2111/CHNY/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Saujanya Ranjan, IRSFor Respondent: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCA
Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ve, the CIT(A) disagreed with the Assessing Officer and, consequently, reversed the order dated 10.03.2014 Notably in reaching his conclusion the Assessing Officer relied upon the judgment in the matter of: Cheminvest Limited v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Vi, 121 ITD 318 (Delhi). 6. The Revenue, being aggrieved, approached the Tribunal. The record shows that during the course of arguments before the Tribunal, the Assessee advanced a submission, to the effect, that in cases, where, investments are made in sister concern(s), out of interest free funds, for strategic purposes, ITA Nos.2110 & 2111/Chny/2025 (AYs 20…

DCIT, CHENNAI vs. THIRUVALLUVAR TEXTILES PRIVATE LIMITED, NAMAKKAL

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 2110/CHNY/2025[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Oct 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey & Shri Amitabh Shukla

For Appellant: Mr.Saujanya Ranjan, IRSFor Respondent: Mr.Y. Sridhar, FCA
Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…ve, the CIT(A) disagreed with the Assessing Officer and, consequently, reversed the order dated 10.03.2014 Notably in reaching his conclusion the Assessing Officer relied upon the judgment in the matter of: Cheminvest Limited v. Commissioner Of Income Tax-Vi, 121 ITD 318 (Delhi). 6. The Revenue, being aggrieved, approached the Tribunal. The record shows that during the course of arguments before the Tribunal, the Assessee advanced a submission, to the effect, that in cases, where, investments are made in sister concern(s), out of interest free funds, for strategic purposes, ITA Nos.2110 & 2111/Chny/2025 (AYs 20…

ACIT CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), MUMBAI vs. NITIN FIRE PROTECTION INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4476/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay N. Kapadiaa, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT D/R
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…s below. The undisputed fact is that Rs. 74,959/- is the reversal entry of excess provision made in the earlier assessment year which means that during the year under consideration there was no exempt income. The Special Bench in Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 121 ITD 318 (Del) (SB), has held that if there is no exempt income, no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, needs to be made. The same is fortified by the decision of Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. reported in 372 ITR 97. On the given facts and circumstances and in light of the judicial decisions…

ASST. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE 3(2), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. NITIN FIRE PROTECTION INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 3695/MUM/2025[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 Sept 2025AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Hon’Ble & Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya, Hon’Ble

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay N. Kapadiaa, A/RFor Respondent: Shri Satyaprakash R. Singh, CIT D/R
Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…s below. The undisputed fact is that Rs. 74,959/- is the reversal entry of excess provision made in the earlier assessment year which means that during the year under consideration there was no exempt income. The Special Bench in Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 121 ITD 318 (Del) (SB), has held that if there is no exempt income, no disallowance u/s 14A of the Act, needs to be made. The same is fortified by the decision of Hon’ble Gujrat High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. reported in 372 ITR 97. On the given facts and circumstances and in light of the judicial decisions…

ITO, WARD- 15(3), NEW DELHI vs. LIVEWIRE COMMERCIAL PVT. LTD., DELHI

In the result, appeal of Revenue in ITA No

ITA 7542/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Jul 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anubhav Sharma & Shri Amitabh Shuklaito, Ward 15(3) Vs. M/S Livewire Commercial Room No. 311-A, 3Rd Private Limited Floor, C.R. Building, 39/1386, Chandni Chowk, I.P. Estate, Delhi – 110006 New Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Aaacl2105J Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Ms. Monika Singh, CIT, DRFor Respondent: Shri Praveen Kumar (Executive of the company)
Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 68

…P a g e | 1 M/s Livewise Commercial Pvt. Ltd. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘F’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI AMITABH SHUKLA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITO, Ward 15(3) Vs. M/s Livewire Commercial Room No. 311-A, 3rd Private Limited Floor, C.R. Building, 39/1386, Chandni Chowk, I.P. Estate, Delhi – 110006 New Delhi – 110002 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No: AAACL2105J Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Ms. Monika Singh, CIT, DR Respondent by : Shri Praveen Kumar (Executive of the company) Date of Hearing 21.07.2025 Date of Pronouncement 30.07.2025 O R D E R…

FENA PRIVATE LIMITED,DELHI vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, NFAC, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, DELHI

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

ITA 2475/DEL/2024[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(3)

…f the Assessee and the learned AR before us is found to be correct and deserves to be accepted in the instant case. The learned DR before us vehemently relied on the decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Chem Invest Ltd vs ITO reported in 121 ITD 318 which held that disallowance of expenses under section 14A of the Act could be made even when no exempt income has been earned or received by the Assessee. This decision has been subsequently reversed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the very same case reported in 378 ITR 33(Del). Either way, this principle is not at all applicable here as exem…

FENA PRIVATE LIMITED,NEW DELHI vs. ADDITIONAL, JOINT, DEPUTY, ACIT, ITO, NATIONAL E-ASSESSMENT CENTRE, DELHI

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

ITA 2474/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jun 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh & Shri Yogesh Kumar U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Raj Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(3)

…f the Assessee and the learned AR before us is found to be correct and deserves to be accepted in the instant case. The learned DR before us vehemently relied on the decision of Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of Chem Invest Ltd vs ITO reported in 121 ITD 318 which held that disallowance of expenses under section 14A of the Act could be made even when no exempt income has been earned or received by the Assessee. This decision has been subsequently reversed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the very same case reported in 378 ITR 33(Del). Either way, this principle is not at all applicable here as exem…

ACIT, CIRCLE 1(1), TRIVANDRUM, TRIVANDRUM vs. HLL LIFECARE LTD, TRIVANDRUM

In the result, the Special Bench decision in the case of Cheminvest

ITA 321/COCH/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin09 Dec 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Prakash Chand Yadav

For Appellant: Smt.Leena Lal, Senior ARFor Respondent: --- None ---
Section 14A

…No.3(a). Learned DR has not rebutted the claim of the assessee that there was no exempt income. Learned CIT(A) had relied on the decision of the 4 ITA No.321/Coch/2024. HLL Lifecare Limited. Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO (121 ITD 318) while holding that the disallowance us/ 14A could be made even in an year where there was no exempt income. Learned CIT(A) had also relied on the judgments of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Catholic Syrian Bank (344 ITR 25). What we find is that in the case before the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court there was a claim o…

ADVANCE INDIA PROJECTS LIMITED,GURGAON vs. PR, CIT CENTRAL DELHI-1, DELHI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 2527/DEL/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareekadvance India Projects Limited, Vs. Pr.Cit, Aipl Business Club, Fifth Floor, Central Delhi 1, Golf Course Extension Road, Sector 62, Delhi. Gurgaon – 122 001 (Haryana). (Pan : Aacca9859J) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. Advocate Shri Shailesh Gupta, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 24.09.2024 Date Of Order : 26.11.2024 O R D E R Per S.Rifaur Rahman,Am: 1. This Appeal Is Filed By The Assessee Against The Order Of Ld. Pr. Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Pcit), Delhi-1 (Hereinafter Referred To 'Ld. Pcit) Dated 28.03.2024 For Assessment Year 2018-19. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are, The Assessee Had Filed Its Return Of Income For Assessment Year 2018–19 On 30.11.2018 Declaring Total Income Of Rs.14,85,19,440/–. The Assessment Was Completed Under Section 143(3) R.W.S 143(3A) & 143(3B) On 09.04.2021 At An Income Of Rs.14,85,39,600/–.

For Appellant: Shri Salil Agarwal, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…reproduced by the ld. PCIT at pages 5 to 7 of the impugned order. 3. After considering the detailed submissions of the assessee, he find it not tenable in light of the facts on record and he relied on the decision of Cheminvest Ltd versus ITO (ITAT, SB – Del) 121 ITD 318 and Pradeep Kar case 319 ITR 416, in which it was held that the expenditure in relation to exempt income is to be disallowed under section 14A of the Act even when no exempt income is earned during the year. Further, he observed that the investments do have potential to earn income which is tax-free. Accordingly he directed the assessing officer…

KESAR TERMINALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,CHURCHGATE, MUMBAI vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1(2)(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI

ITA 3995/MUM/2024[AY 2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 80I

…his addition by relying on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT & Ant. Reported in 234 CTR (Bombay) 1 (2020) and Hon'ble Special Bench of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. ITO 317 ITR 86 (80), whereas it is a fact that in the case of Godrej Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble High Court has held that the AO could invoke the provision of section 14A(2) & (3) of the Act and disallow the expenditure in accordance with Rule 8D of the ITAT Rules, only when dividend income was received by the Assessee and the Assessee has neither of…

KESAR TERMINALS AND INFRASTRUCTURE LIMITED,CHURCHGATE, MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 1(2)(1), AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MUMBAI

ITA 3994/MUM/2024[AY 2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Oct 2024

Bench: Shri Narender Kumar Choudhry & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara

Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 80I

…his addition by relying on the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT & Ant. Reported in 234 CTR (Bombay) 1 (2020) and Hon'ble Special Bench of the ITAT, Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. ITO 317 ITR 86 (80), whereas it is a fact that in the case of Godrej Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (supra) the Hon'ble High Court has held that the AO could invoke the provision of section 14A(2) & (3) of the Act and disallow the expenditure in accordance with Rule 8D of the ITAT Rules, only when dividend income was received by the Assessee and the Assessee has neither of…

M/S HEM SIL TRADING AND MNUFACTURING PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. ACIT, CIR-12(2)(2), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4633/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran, Am & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal, Jm M/S. Hem Sil Trading & Asst. Cit, Circle 12(2)(2) Manufacturing Private Limited Mumbai Plot No. 645/646, Oberoi Chambers Ii, Vs. New Link Road, Andheri, Mumbai-400 053 Pan/Gir No. Aaach 1716 P (Assessee) (Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Agrawal a/wFor Respondent: Shri P. D. Chougule
Section 115JSection 14Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…he assessee did not earn any exempt income during this year and contended that no disallowance u/s.14A is required to be made when there is no exempt income. The ld. AR relied on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. ITO 124 TTJ 577 and the Delhi Special Bench decision in the case of Vireet Investment Pvt. Ltd. [2018] 165 ITD 27. 9. On the above factual matrix of the case, it is observed that the lower authorities have not denied the fact that the assessee has not earned any exempt income during the year under consideration but has held that the criteria whether the assesse…

DCIT CENTRAL CIRCLE-28, NEW DELHI vs. JINDAL ITF LIMITED, NEW DELHI

Accordingly, the appeal and application are dismissed

ITA 1776/DEL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu & Ms. Madhumita Royi.T.A. No. 1776/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) Dcit Vs. M/S. Jindal Itf Limited Central Circle – 28 28, Shivaji Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110 015 Pan: Aabcj 9263 C (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G. S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND MS. MADHUMITA ROY, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 1776/Del/2023 (Assessment Year : 2012-13) DCIT Vs. M/s. Jindal ITF Limited Central Circle – 28 28, Shivaji Marg, New Delhi New Delhi-110 015 PAN: AABCJ 9263 C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Appellant by : Shri Vinod Kumar Bindal, CA Ms. Rinky Sharma, Adv. Respondent by : Ms. Parul Singh, Sr. D.R. Date of Hearing 26.06.2024 08.07.2024 Date of Pronouncement O R D E R PER MS. MADHUMITA ROY – JUDICIAL MEMBER : The instant appeal filed by the Revenue is direct…

M/S. TOURISM FINANCE CORPORATION OF INDIA LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the Assessee is partly

ITA 6130/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: the time of hearing."

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 36(1)(viia)

…income not forming part of total income then disallowance would be justified even where there is no receipt of exempted income u/s 10 in the year under consideration in view of the decision of special bench in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs Income Tax Officer 124 TTJ 577 (Del) (SB). 32. After observing above, the Assessing Officer observed that he is not satisfied with the method of computation for disallowance submitted by the assessee and also recorded his satisfaction for disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. He proceeded to disallow interest and administrative expenses by applying Rule 8D and determined the di…

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX- 4(1)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI vs. ACZET PRIVATE LIMITED, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3869/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14A

…ovisions of Section 14A, actual earning of Income Is not sine qua non for deciding deduction of expenditure laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for purpose of such income. The Hon'ble Special Bench of ITAT, Delhi in case of  Cheminvest Limited vs. ITO 317 ITR 86 (AT) had held that the disallowance u/s.14A can be made even if no exempt income is actually earned or received during the year from the investments in stock, shares, tax-free bonds, tax-free schemes of UT, other mutual funds and agricultural land, Investments in IOA/IOB eligible units by the main non-eligible units. Further, the CBDT vide Circula…

ACZET PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3708/MUM/2023[2013-2014]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2013-2014

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14A

…ovisions of Section 14A, actual earning of Income Is not sine qua non for deciding deduction of expenditure laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for purpose of such income. The Hon'ble Special Bench of ITAT, Delhi in case of  Cheminvest Limited vs. ITO 317 ITR 86 (AT) had held that the disallowance u/s.14A can be made even if no exempt income is actually earned or received during the year from the investments in stock, shares, tax-free bonds, tax-free schemes of UT, other mutual funds and agricultural land, Investments in IOA/IOB eligible units by the main non-eligible units. Further, the CBDT vide Circula…

ACZET PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIRCLE 4(1)(1), MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 3707/MUM/2023[2014-2015]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Apr 2024AY 2014-2015

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla, Hon’Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14A

…ovisions of Section 14A, actual earning of Income Is not sine qua non for deciding deduction of expenditure laid out or expended wholly or exclusively for purpose of such income. The Hon'ble Special Bench of ITAT, Delhi in case of  Cheminvest Limited vs. ITO 317 ITR 86 (AT) had held that the disallowance u/s.14A can be made even if no exempt income is actually earned or received during the year from the investments in stock, shares, tax-free bonds, tax-free schemes of UT, other mutual funds and agricultural land, Investments in IOA/IOB eligible units by the main non-eligible units. Further, the CBDT vide Circula…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX , MUMBAI vs. PALCHIN REAL ESTATE PVT LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2553/MUM/2023[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Feb 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY (Judicial Member), SHRI S RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri K. Shivram & Rahul HakaniFor Respondent: Shri Solgy Jose t. Kottaram (CIT
Section 14ASection 270A

…rther the rulings of the courts in the following cases are applicable to the Assessee’s case 1. LLOYDS Steel Industries Limited v/s. ACIT (ITAT-Mumbai) 20 SOT 40. 2. CIT v/s. Leena Ramachandran (Ker) 339 ITR 296. 3. Cheminvest Limited v/s. ITO (ITAT, SB-DEL) 121 ITD 318. 4. Pradeep Kar v/s. ACIT (Kar) 319 ITR 416. Thus, after duly considering all the submissions made on behalf of the Assessee as also the case laws relied upon, the contention of the Assessee that the deductions under 14-A are not applicable in its case, 4 A.Y. 2018-19 M/s. Palchin Real Estate Pvt. Ltd. is not acceptable and hence the disallowanc…

TRUE-MAN CONSULTANTS PVT. LTD. ,KOLKATA vs. ITO,WARD-7(2),KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

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

ITA 1158/KOL/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata23 Feb 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 131Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 68

…on if the assessee has not earned any dividend income from the investments during the year, disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is uncalled for. We place reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs ITO reported in [2009] 121 ITD 318 (Delhi), PCIT vs. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd. reported in [2022] 141 taxmann.com 289 (Delhi). 14. Respectfully following the same and considering the fact that no dividend income has been earned by the assessee during the year disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is uncalled for and accordingly, addition of Rs. 1,02,350/- is deleted. 15. As far as…

Showing 1–20 of 338 · Page 1 of 17

...