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 367,181 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

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

…ld incur a sum of Rs.4.93 cores of expenditure for earning dividend income of Rs.43.35 lakhs. He further pointed out that the ld.AO has 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…

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

…ld incur a sum of Rs.4.93 cores of expenditure for earning dividend income of Rs.43.35 lakhs. He further pointed out that the ld.AO has 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…

ACIT Non Corporate Circle 10(1), Chennai vs. Smt Prabha Parakh, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal and the Revenue ‘s appeal for the

ITA 655/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकरअपीलसं/.I.T.A. Nos. 516 & 517/Chny/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, JCIT
Section 147Section 14A

…oted shares, incurred huge interest expenditure apart from various administrative expenses. Invoking section 14A r.w.r. 8D, he disallowed Rs. 3,07,221/-, relying on the special bench decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vs ITO (ITAT Special Bench) Delhi, 121 ITD 318. While making assessment for assessment year 2013-14, he disallowed Rs. 11,78,383/- u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii) & (iii) on the dividend income at Rs. 12,82,077/-. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 516, 517 & 655 /Chny/2018 2.1 Aggrieved against the order of the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2009-10, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challeng…

Smt. Prabha Parakh, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corp Circle 10 (1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal and the Revenue ‘s appeal for the

ITA 517/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकरअपीलसं/.I.T.A. Nos. 516 & 517/Chny/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, JCIT
Section 147Section 14A

…oted shares, incurred huge interest expenditure apart from various administrative expenses. Invoking section 14A r.w.r. 8D, he disallowed Rs. 3,07,221/-, relying on the special bench decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vs ITO (ITAT Special Bench) Delhi, 121 ITD 318. While making assessment for assessment year 2013-14, he disallowed Rs. 11,78,383/- u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii) & (iii) on the dividend income at Rs. 12,82,077/-. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 516, 517 & 655 /Chny/2018 2.1 Aggrieved against the order of the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2009-10, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challeng…

Smt. Prabha Parakh, Chennai vs. DCIT Non Corp Circle 10 (1), Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal and the Revenue ‘s appeal for the

ITA 516/CHNY/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaramanआयकरअपीलसं/.I.T.A. Nos. 516 & 517/Chny/2018 "नधा"रणवष"/Assessment Year : 2009-10 & 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Guru Bashyam, JCIT
Section 147Section 14A

…oted shares, incurred huge interest expenditure apart from various administrative expenses. Invoking section 14A r.w.r. 8D, he disallowed Rs. 3,07,221/-, relying on the special bench decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vs ITO (ITAT Special Bench) Delhi, 121 ITD 318. While making assessment for assessment year 2013-14, he disallowed Rs. 11,78,383/- u/s. 14A r.w.r. 8D(ii) & (iii) on the dividend income at Rs. 12,82,077/-. :- 3 -: ITA Nos. 516, 517 & 655 /Chny/2018 2.1 Aggrieved against the order of the Assessing Officer for assessment year 2009-10, the assessee filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) challeng…

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

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

ITA 6780/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jul 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2011-12] Ufo Moviez India Ltd Vs. The Dy. C.I.T 1-B, First Floor, Sagar Apartments Circle 27(1) 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi New Delhi Pan : Aabcv 8900 E [Appellant] [Respondent] Date Of Hearing : 31.07.2018 Date Of Pronouncement : 31.07.2018

For Appellant: Shri Piyush Chawla, AdvFor Respondent: Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR
Section 14A

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘I-2’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER [A.Y 2011-12] UFO Moviez India Ltd Vs. The Dy. C.I.T 1-B, First Floor, Sagar Apartments Circle 27(1) 6, Tilak Marg, New Delhi New Delhi PAN : AABCV 8900 E [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 31.07.2018 Date of Pronouncement : 31.07.2018 Assessee by : Shri Piyush Chawla, Adv Revenue by : Shri H.K. Choudhary, CIT- DR ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order of the DRP-2, New Delhi dat…

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

…e of DCIT vs. Ballarpur Industries Ltd. (supra) held that section 14A would not apply if no exempt income is received or receivable during the relevant previous year. Similar view was taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs. ITO (121 ITD 318)(Del.)(SB) (supra). Considering the factual and legal position, we find that Ground No.1 is covered in favour of the assessee. In the result this ground of appeal is allowed. 3. Ground No.2 raised by the assessee relates to disallowance of interest expenses under section 40(a)(ia). Ld. Representative for the assessee submitted that Ground No.…

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

…ITA No 450 of 2017 Mercury Projects P Ltd Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ B ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member Dy. Commissioner of Vs M/s. Mercury Projects Income Tax, Circle 16(2) Private Limited, Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN: AADCM9019R (Appellant) (Respondent) For Revenue : Smt. N. Swapna, DR For Assessee : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao Date of Hearing: 09.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement: 18.07.2018 O R D E R Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M. This is Revenue’s appeal for the A.Y 2011-12 against the order of the learn…

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

…no dividend income had been earned by the Assessee in the relevant AY? The Court referred to the decision of this Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra) and to the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT in this very case i.e. Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT (2009) 317 ITR 86. The Court also referred to three decisions of different High Courts which have decided the issue against Revenue. The first was the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. M/s. Lakhani Marketing Incl. (decision dated 2nd April 2014 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in ITA No. 970/2008) which in turn referred to two earlier deci…

Mylan Laboratories Limited (Formerly Known As Matrix Laboratories., Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is also dismissed

ITA 1730/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanm/S.Mylan Laboratories Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income (Formerly Matrix Tax, Circle 16(2) Laboratories Ltd) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcm3491M (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Mylan Laboratories Ltd Income Tax, Circle (Formerly Matrix Laboratories Ltd) 16(2), Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcm3491M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(i)

…ITA Nos 1730 and 1645 of 2017 Mylan Laboratories Ltd Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member M/s.Mylan Laboratories Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income (formerly Matrix Tax, Circle 16(2) Laboratories Ltd) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN: AADCM3491M (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner of Vs M/s. Mylan Laboratories Ltd Income Tax, Circle (formerly Matrix Laboratories Ltd) 16(2), Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN: AADCM3491M (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.A. Sai Prasad For Revenue…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad vs. Mylan Laboratories Limited (Formerly Known As Matrix Laboratories Limited), Hyderabad

In the result, assessee’s appeal is also dismissed

ITA 1645/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad29 Jun 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri S.Rifaur Rahmanm/S.Mylan Laboratories Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner Of Income (Formerly Matrix Tax, Circle 16(2) Laboratories Ltd) Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcm3491M (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs M/S. Mylan Laboratories Ltd Income Tax, Circle (Formerly Matrix Laboratories Ltd) 16(2), Hyderabad Hyderabad Pan: Aadcm3491M (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri K.A. Sai PrasadFor Respondent: Shri J. Siri Kumar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(ii)Section 35Section 35(1)Section 35(1)(i)

…ITA Nos 1730 and 1645 of 2017 Mylan Laboratories Ltd Hyderabad. IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL Hyderabad ‘ A ‘ Bench, Hyderabad Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member AND Shri S.Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member M/s.Mylan Laboratories Ltd Vs Dy. Commissioner of Income (formerly Matrix Tax, Circle 16(2) Laboratories Ltd) Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN: AADCM3491M (Appellant) (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner of Vs M/s. Mylan Laboratories Ltd Income Tax, Circle (formerly Matrix Laboratories Ltd) 16(2), Hyderabad Hyderabad PAN: AADCM3491M (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee : Shri K.A. Sai Prasad For Revenue…

DCIT, Circle-6, Kolkata vs. M/S. Umil Share & Stock Broking Services Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2089/KOL/2014[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Jun 2018AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A. No. 2089/Kol/2014 Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit Circle 6 Kolkata....................................…………………………..............................Appellant Aayakar Bhawan, 6Th Floor, Room No. 6/17, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata – 700 069. M/S. Umil Share & Stock Broking Services Ltd...…………………........................Respondent 24, R.N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata – 700 001. [Pan : Aaacu 3331 K] Appearances By: Shri P.K. Srihari, Cit Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Fca Appearing On Behalf Of The Assessee. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : May 09, 2018 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : June 22, 2018 Order Per P.M. Jagtap, Am This Appeal Is Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Of Ld. Cit(A) – Vi, Kolkata Dated 28.08.2014. 2. In Ground No 1, The Revenue Has Challenged The Action Of The Ld. Cit(A) In Restricting The Disallowance Of Rs. 1,27,34,577/- Made By The Ao Under Section 14A Of The Act Read With Rule 8D To Rs. 36,39,744/-.

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…lause (iii) of Rule 8D (2), only the investment which had actually given rise to exempt income is to be taken into account. Though the ratio of the said decision is contrary to that of the decision of special bench of ITAT Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. 121 ITD 318 (Delhi)(SB)), as well as the Board's Circular no. 5/2014 dated 11.2.2014 on the issue. I am. in line with principle of judicial discipline, following the ratio given by the jurisdictional bench of tribunal. According to the appellant, on following this ratio disallowance under clause (iii) of Rule 8D(2) would be reduced to Rs. 36,39,744/-. Thus t…

Indokem Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 6(1)(3), Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1419/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year : 2011-12 Ito 6(3)(2), Indokem Ltd., Mumbai 410/411 Khatau House, Vs. Mogul Lane, Mahim, Mumbai 400 016

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri M V Rajguru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)Section 69C

…f the Income tax Rules, 1962, does not arise. The Assessing Officer after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also relying upon various decisions including the decision of ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. ITO 317 ITR 86 (AT) 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. The Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee cannot earn dividend without systematic management and the activity of investment is very complex in nature. It requires substantial market resea…

ITO 6(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Indokem Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the Revenue’s appeal is dismissed and that of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1414/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri G Manjunathaassessment Year : 2011-12 Ito 6(3)(2), Indokem Ltd., Mumbai 410/411 Khatau House, Vs. Mogul Lane, Mahim, Mumbai 400 016

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri M V Rajguru
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(2)Section 69C

…f the Income tax Rules, 1962, does not arise. The Assessing Officer after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also relying upon various decisions including the decision of ITAT Delhi Special Bench in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. ITO 317 ITR 86 (AT) 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. The Assessing Officer further observed that the assessee cannot earn dividend without systematic management and the activity of investment is very complex in nature. It requires substantial market resea…

Asst CIT 15(2)(1), Mumbai vs. Hcc Real Estate Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose and the appeal by the Revenue stands dismissed

ITA 693/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm

For Respondent: Shri B. Sriniwas

…ssessing Officer noted that the dividend income being exempt, the assessee has not disallowed any expenditure u/s. 14A. The Assessing Officer has made disallowance u/s. 14A by also referring to special bench decision in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs. ITO 317 ITR 86 (AT) for the proposition that the disallowance u/s. 14A can be made even if no exempt income is actually earned. After having held so, the Assessing Officer has proceeded to make the disallowance u/s. 14A amounting to Rs.783.15 lacs. 16. Before the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee made elaborate submissions and also furni…

The ITO, Ward-5(2), Ahmedabad vs. Parry Enginnering & Electronics Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1034/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavसव"ी Izeksn Dqekj Izeksn Dqekj Izeksn Dqekj लेखा सद"य, एवं राजपाल यादव "या"यक सद"य के सम"। Izeksn Dqekj आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1033 & 1034/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Parry Engineering & Ward-3(1)(2), Vs Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad. B-608, Nirman Complex, Opp. Havmore Restaurant, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp 6747 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr.D.R. Assessee By : Shri G. C. Pipara, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri G. C. Pipara, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ngineering and Electronics Pvt. Ltd. A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 3 – made by the appellant should be capable of producing or generating exempt income. This issue is amply covered by the decision of Hon'ble Delhi Special Bench in the case of Ken Investment Ltd 121 ITD 318 (2009) (S.B). With regard to the claim that the investments made by the appellant were in the nature of trade investment made with an objective of furthering the business interest of the company, this aspect has been considered by various judicial authorities, in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. [203 taxman 185 (Delhi)] the Hon'ble Special Ben…

The ACIT, Circle-5, Ahmedabad vs. Parry Enginnering & Electronics Pvt.Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 1033/AHD/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad06 Jun 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar & Shri Rajpal Yadavसव"ी Izeksn Dqekj Izeksn Dqekj Izeksn Dqekj लेखा सद"य, एवं राजपाल यादव "या"यक सद"य के सम"। Izeksn Dqekj आयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 1033 & 1034/Ahd/2015 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Income Tax Officer, Parry Engineering & Ward-3(1)(2), Vs Electronics Pvt. Ltd. Ahmedabad. B-608, Nirman Complex, Opp. Havmore Restaurant, Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacp 6747 J अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr.D.R. Assessee By : Shri G. C. Pipara, A.R.

For Appellant: Shri G. C. Pipara, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Saurabh Singh, Sr.D.R
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ngineering and Electronics Pvt. Ltd. A.Ys. 2010-11 & 2011-12 - 3 – made by the appellant should be capable of producing or generating exempt income. This issue is amply covered by the decision of Hon'ble Delhi Special Bench in the case of Ken Investment Ltd 121 ITD 318 (2009) (S.B). With regard to the claim that the investments made by the appellant were in the nature of trade investment made with an objective of furthering the business interest of the company, this aspect has been considered by various judicial authorities, in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. [203 taxman 185 (Delhi)] the Hon'ble Special Ben…

DCIT, Cir-1(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Akj Minerals Limited, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 573/KOL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jun 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 14A

…1 AKJ Minerals Limited, AY 2007-08 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “D” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. No. 573/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. AKJ Minerals Limited Circle-1(1), Kolkata. (PAN: AAACL4712B) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 24.05.2018 Date of Pronouncement 06.06.2018 For the Appellant Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. CIT For the Respondent N o n e ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This is a…

Hi Choice Processors Pvt.Ltd., Surat vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-1, Surat

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

ITA 2922/AHD/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Surat05 Jun 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri C.M.Garg & Shri O.P.Meenaआ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.2922/Ahd/2015/Srt िनधा"रण वष"/A.Y.:2011-12 M/S. Hi Choice Processors Pvt. Vs. Deputy Commissioner Of Ltd. , 264 Gidc, Sachin Surat Income-Tax, Central Pan: Aaach 7062E Circle1, Surat अपीलाथ" Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

Section 143Section 14A

…ade several other investment which are capable to yield exempt income. The assessee has incurred interest expenditure of Rs. 49,07,846 including bank interest and interest on unsecured loans. The CIT (A) has relied in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 121 ITD 318 (Del) (SB) /[2009] 317 ITR 86 (Del)(SB) wherein it was observed that when expenditure of interest is incurred in relation to income which does not form part of total income, disallowance of u/s. 14A is to be made even if no exempt Hi Choice Processors Pvt. Ltd. v. DCIT-Cen-1 Surat /I.T.A. No.2922 /Ahd/2015/SRT/A.Y.11-12 Page 3 of 6 income is ear…

Ideal Toll & Infrastructure P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 6(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7758/MUM/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am)& Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…no dividend income had been earned by the Assessee in the relevant AY? The Court referred to the decision of this Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. (supra) and to the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT in this very case i.e. Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT(2009) 317 ITR 86. The Court also referred to three decisions of different High Courts which have decided the issue against Revenue. The first was the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad v. M/s. Lakhani Marketing Incl. (decision dated 2nd April 2014 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana in ITA No. 970/2008) which in turn referred toITA No. 6079/Del/…