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 367,154 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

The DCIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Sfo Technologies P. Ltd, Aluva

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 403/COCH/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

…ear has not earned any exempt income. The above aspect has been settled by the Honorable High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. V CIT (378 ITT 33) which has overruled the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of CheminvestLtd. V ITO (121 ITD 318). Further, the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs IL & FS Energy Development Co Ltd (399 ITR 483) held that CBDT Circular 5/2014 cannot override the express provisions of Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Apex Court confirmed the decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT VsChettinad Logistics (P) Ltd., (80 taxmann 221) also held that…

The DCIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Sfo Technologies P. Ltd, Aluva

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 402/COCH/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

…ear has not earned any exempt income. The above aspect has been settled by the Honorable High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. V CIT (378 ITT 33) which has overruled the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of CheminvestLtd. V ITO (121 ITD 318). Further, the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs IL & FS Energy Development Co Ltd (399 ITR 483) held that CBDT Circular 5/2014 cannot override the express provisions of Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Apex Court confirmed the decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT VsChettinad Logistics (P) Ltd., (80 taxmann 221) also held that…

The DCIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Sfo Technologies P. Ltd, Ernakulam

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 401/COCH/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

…ear has not earned any exempt income. The above aspect has been settled by the Honorable High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. V CIT (378 ITT 33) which has overruled the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of CheminvestLtd. V ITO (121 ITD 318). Further, the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs IL & FS Energy Development Co Ltd (399 ITR 483) held that CBDT Circular 5/2014 cannot override the express provisions of Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Apex Court confirmed the decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT VsChettinad Logistics (P) Ltd., (80 taxmann 221) also held that…

The DCIT, Kochi vs. M/S.Sfo Technologies P. Ltd, Aluva

In the result, this appeal filed by Revenue in ITA

ITA 400/COCH/2020[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin24 Feb 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri George Mathan, Jm & Shri Ramit Kochar, Am

For Appellant: Smt. Jamunna Devi, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Shri Anil D. Nair& Smt. Telma
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

…ear has not earned any exempt income. The above aspect has been settled by the Honorable High Court of Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. V CIT (378 ITT 33) which has overruled the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of CheminvestLtd. V ITO (121 ITD 318). Further, the Delhi High Court in the case of PCIT Vs IL & FS Energy Development Co Ltd (399 ITR 483) held that CBDT Circular 5/2014 cannot override the express provisions of Section 14A read with Rule 8D. The Apex Court confirmed the decision of Madras High Court in the case of CIT VsChettinad Logistics (P) Ltd., (80 taxmann 221) also held that…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.276/Del

ITA 276/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rahul PrabhakarFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Maurya, CIT
Section 115JSection 14A

…A.Nos.1001 & 1002/Del./2016 And ITA.No.276/Del./2017 M/s. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi. been received by the assessee during the year. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs., CIT [2009] 317 ITR 86 (Del.) the order of the Ld. CIT(A) does not suffer from any infirmity. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal number.3 raised by the Revenue on this issue is dismissed. 8. Grounds of appeal number.4 of the Revenue relates to disallowance of Rs.9,51,432/- made by the A.O. on account of depreciation claimed being 40% on Aircraft which was not in use.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.276/Del

ITA 1002/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rahul PrabhakarFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Maurya, CIT
Section 115JSection 14A

…A.Nos.1001 & 1002/Del./2016 And ITA.No.276/Del./2017 M/s. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi. been received by the assessee during the year. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs., CIT [2009] 317 ITR 86 (Del.) the order of the Ld. CIT(A) does not suffer from any infirmity. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal number.3 raised by the Revenue on this issue is dismissed. 8. Grounds of appeal number.4 of the Revenue relates to disallowance of Rs.9,51,432/- made by the A.O. on account of depreciation claimed being 40% on Aircraft which was not in use.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA.No.276/Del

ITA 1001/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Narendra Kumar Choudhary

For Appellant: Shri Rahul PrabhakarFor Respondent: Shri P.C. Maurya, CIT
Section 115JSection 14A

…A.Nos.1001 & 1002/Del./2016 And ITA.No.276/Del./2017 M/s. Jagson International Ltd., New Delhi. been received by the assessee during the year. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Limited vs., CIT [2009] 317 ITR 86 (Del.) the order of the Ld. CIT(A) does not suffer from any infirmity. Accordingly, the grounds of appeal number.3 raised by the Revenue on this issue is dismissed. 8. Grounds of appeal number.4 of the Revenue relates to disallowance of Rs.9,51,432/- made by the A.O. on account of depreciation claimed being 40% on Aircraft which was not in use.…

Subbunadar Chandrasekar @ S.C.Sekar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal for the assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed for statistical ...

ITA 364/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.363 & 364/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Subbunadar Chandrasekar Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of @ S.C. Sekar, No. 19, Thambusamy Income Tax, Company Circle Vi(3), Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010. 121, Nungambakkam High Road, [Pan:Aaepc4430C] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai Both Dated 15.12.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011- 12 & 2012-13. Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…, the Assessing Officer determined the expenditure component to the extent of ₹.76,517/- under Rule 8D(2)(iii) and brought to tax. On appeal, respectfully following the ratio of the judgements of Delhi Special Bench in the case of M/s. Chem Invest Ltd. v. ITO 121 ITD 318 and ITAT Chennai in the case of Shiva Industries & Holdings Ltd. v. ACIT reported in 54 SOT 49 Chennai (2012), the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance made under section 14A of the Act. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly, the assessee has earned dividend income to the tune of ₹.7,3…

Subbunadar Chandrasekar @ S.C.Sekar, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for the assessment year 2011-12 is allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal for the assessment year 2012-13 is partly allowed for statistical ...

ITA 363/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai24 Jan 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.363 & 364/Chny/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2011-12 & 2012-13 Shri Subbunadar Chandrasekar Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of @ S.C. Sekar, No. 19, Thambusamy Income Tax, Company Circle Vi(3), Road, Kilpauk, Chennai 600 010. 121, Nungambakkam High Road, [Pan:Aaepc4430C] Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri D. Anand, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 17.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 24.01.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Same Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai Both Dated 15.12.2015 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2011- 12 & 2012-13. Both The Appeals Were Heard Together & Being Disposed Of By This Common Order For The Sake Of Brevity.

For Appellant: Shri D. Anand, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 68

…, the Assessing Officer determined the expenditure component to the extent of ₹.76,517/- under Rule 8D(2)(iii) and brought to tax. On appeal, respectfully following the ratio of the judgements of Delhi Special Bench in the case of M/s. Chem Invest Ltd. v. ITO 121 ITD 318 and ITAT Chennai in the case of Shiva Industries & Holdings Ltd. v. ACIT reported in 54 SOT 49 Chennai (2012), the ld. CIT(A) confirmed the disallowance made under section 14A of the Act. 10. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly, the assessee has earned dividend income to the tune of ₹.7,3…

Care Ratings Ltd., Mumbai vs. Asstt, CIT-6(2)(1), Mumbai

Accordingly, the disallowance of Rs.1,07,16,645/- made by the A.O u/s 14A r.w Rule 8D is vacated. The Ground of appeal No. 1 is allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1832/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar () & Shri Ravish Sood () Care Ratings Limited Asst. Commissioner Of 4Th Floor, Godrej Vs. Income Tax-6(2)(1), Coliseum, Somaiya Aayakar Bhavan, Hospital Road, Off Maharishi Karve Road, Eastern Express Highway, Mumbai – 400 020 Sion (East), Mumbai – 400 022 Pan No. Aaacc4587F (Assessee) (Revenue) Assessee By : Shri Tejas Sodha, A.R Revenue By : Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R Date Of Hearing : 04/10/2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08/10/2021

For Appellant: Shri Tejas Sodha, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…mbay High Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT & Anr. reported in 234 CTR (Bom) 1 (2010). 3.4 Further, reliance is also placed in the recent judgment of Hon'ble Special Bench of ITAT, Delhi in the case of Cheminvest Ltd., Vs. ITO [(2009) 121 ITD 318 (Delhi)(SB)], wherein it has been 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 investment. Therefore, the disallowance is to be worked out, even if there is no exempt income earned. Prior to Rule 8D, the apportionment of expenditure was at the discretion of Asses…

Unison Metal Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 170/AHD/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr DR
Section 14A

…n the reasoning what weighed with the Assessing Officer while calculating the disallowance for the purpose of Section 14A; however, a perusal of his reliance upon the decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vs. ITO, reported in 124 TTJ 577 (Del) (SB) as well as his findings in AY 2014-15, we find that the learned Assessing Officer was for the view that the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act is to be made by keeping in mind the reasoning that the expenditure in relation to the exempt income is required to be disallowed and not to examine whether the expenditure incurred by th…

Unison Metal Limited, Ahmedabad vs. The Dy. CIT, Circle-4(1)(2), Ahmedabad

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

ITA 169/AHD/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmed

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.R. Makwana, Sr DR
Section 14A

…n the reasoning what weighed with the Assessing Officer while calculating the disallowance for the purpose of Section 14A; however, a perusal of his reliance upon the decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cheminvest Ltd vs. ITO, reported in 124 TTJ 577 (Del) (SB) as well as his findings in AY 2014-15, we find that the learned Assessing Officer was for the view that the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act is to be made by keeping in mind the reasoning that the expenditure in relation to the exempt income is required to be disallowed and not to examine whether the expenditure incurred by th…

Ravi Goenka, Mumbai vs. ACIT 17(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5132/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr. Ravi Goenka, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 15, Shirin Chambers, 348/50, Vs. Circle 17(3), Samuel Street, Vadgadi, Room No. 137, 1St Floor, Mumbai-400 003. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aacpg 9107 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shekhar Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Bharat Andhale, DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…of section 14A in respect of dividend income. Few of them are quoted below-  Smt. Leena Ramachandran [(2011) 339 ITR 296 (Ker)]  Technopack Advisors P Ltd [(2012) 50 SOT 31 (Delhi)(URO)]  Relaxo Footwear Ltd [ (2012) 50 SOT 102 (Delhi)]  Cheminvest Ltd {121 ITD 318 2009 (DEL)]  Yogesh J Shah [(2010)(46 SOT 183) (Mum) (URO] Therefore, in the light of the above discussion the undersigned is satisfied as per section 14A (3) that the expenditure in relation to the exempt income has not been correctly disallowed by the assessee and it is to be disallowed as per Rule 8D. For the calculation purpose, it is to b…

Addl.CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Sara Sae Pvt. Ltd. (Earlier Known As Nov Sara India Pvt. Ltd.), New Delhi

ITA 3764/DEL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 Sept 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri O.P.Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 6Section 80Section 80I

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) BEFORE SHRI O.P.KANT, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3764/Del./2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 11-12 Addl. CIT Vs. Sara Sae Pvt. Ltd. Special Range-8, (Earlier known as Nov Room No. 199A, 1st floor Sara India Pvt. Ltd.) New Delhi GL-3, Ashoka Estate, C.R.Building 24, Barakhamba Road New Delhi New Delhi (PAN :AAACS6857L) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) REVENUE BY : Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. DR ASSESSEE BY : None Date of Hearing : 08.07.2021 Date of Order : 22 . 09.2021 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH…

Pnnj Industries P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO, W-15(2)(4), Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal is allowed in terms indicated above

ITA 1131/MUM/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman

For Appellant: Shri Narayan AtalFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…he disallowance under section 14A to the extent of dividend income of ` 3,70,034. In support of his contentions, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v/s DCIT & Anr., [2010] 234 CTR 001 (Bom.); ii) Cheminvest Ltd. v/s ITO, 317 ITR 86 (AT); iii) Sanchayita Mercantile Pvt. Ltd. v/s ACIT, 25 SOT 57 (Mum.). 5. The learned Departmental Representative relied upon the orders of the authorities below. 6 M/s. PN NJ Industries Pvt. Ltd. 6. Considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. We find that the learned Authorised Representative fairly conceded for the di…

Amadeus India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 2(2), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 7376/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Ms. Suchitra Kamble[A.Y 2014-15]

For Appellant: Shri Tarandeep Singh, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92F

…We find that during the year under consideration, the assessee has earned no exempt income. Therefore, in the light of the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s Cheminvest Ltd 121 ITD 318 which was affirmed by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi. Same view is taken by the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd 372 ITR 97. We are of the considered opinion that no disallowance should have been made u/s 14A of the Act. We accordingly direct the Assessing Officer to delete the addition of Rs. 38,31,472/-. 25. C…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Ub Infrastructure Projects Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue dismissed

ITA 2813/BANG/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari, Am & Shri George George K, Jm

For Appellant: Smt.Girija G.P., AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl.CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…l on record. Admittedly in this case, no exempted income was earned during the relevant assessment year. The A.O. while making the disallowance u/s 14A of the I.T.Act, had relied on the Special Bench order of the Tribunal in Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO reported in 121 ITD 318. The said order of the Tribunal was reversed by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court on 02.09.2015.The judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court is reported in 378 ITR 33, wherein the Hon’ble Delhi High Court had clearly held that unless exempted income earned during the relevant assessment year, there cannot be any disallowance u/s 14A of the I.T.Act. Th…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Richmond Park Property Management Service Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3655/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3655/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ito Vs M/S. Richmond Park Property Ward-21(3), Management Service Pvt. Ltd., 9Th Floor Dlf Centre, Sansad Marg, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccr0095H Assessee By : Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. Amit Shukla, Judicial Member Dr. B. R. R. Kumar, Accountant Member (Through Video Conferencing) ITA No. 3655/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 ITO Vs M/s. Richmond Park Property Ward-21(3), Management Service Pvt. Ltd., 9th Floor DLF Centre, Sansad Marg, New Delhi New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AACCR0095H Assessee by : Sh. Satyajeet Goel, CA Revenue by : Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Sr. DR Date of Hearing: 05.11.2020 Date of Pronouncement: 11.11.2020 ORDER Per Amit Shukla, Judicial Member: The present appeal has been filed by the reve…

Jt. CIT (OSD), CC-7(1), Mumbai vs. M/S Rare Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1562/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Oct 2020AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri S. C. TiwariFor Respondent: Shri Dihashis (DR)
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…y declared dividend, those shares are held by the assessee, though the assessee has to ultimately trade those shares by selling them to earn profits." (d) Fourthly, the AO has observed that the Hon Tale Delhi High Court has held in the case of Cheminvest Ltd (317 ITR 86) that disallowance u/s 14A can be in a year in which no exempt income has been earned or received by the assessee. This interpretation of the AO is not correct as the Hon tile Delhi High Court has held otherwise, i.e., no disallowance is required when there is no exempt income. Thus, we notice that the AO has proceeded to invoke the provisions of…

Sach Electro Mech Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(1)(2), Surat

In the result ground No. 4 of the appeal is allowed

ITA 262/AHD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Surat09 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Hon'Ble & Dr Arjun Lal Saini, Hon'Ble(Virtual Court - Virtual Hearing) आ.अ.सं./I.T.A No.262/Ahd/2017 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sach Electro Mech Pvt. Ltd., V The Income Tax Officer, C/2, Maheshwari Apartment, S Ward-2(1)(2), Surat. Timaliyawad, Nanpura, . Surat – 395 001. [Pan: Aaics 8963 M] अपीलाथ" / Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रतीक"ओरसे /Assessee By Shri Manish J.Shah – Ar राज"वक"ओरसे /Revenue By Mrs. Anupam Singla – Sr.Dr

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(v)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37Section 40Section 43B

…dend income had been earned by the Assessee in the relevant AY? The Court referred to the decision of this Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd's. case (supra) and to the decision of the Special Bench of the ITAT in this very case i.e. Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO [2009] 121 ITD 318. The Court also referred to three decisions of different High Courts which have decided the issue against Revenue. The first was the decision in CIT v. Lakhani Marketing Inc . [2014] 226 Taxman 45/49 taxmann.com 257 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana which in turn referred to two earlier decisions of the same Court in CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd.…

Cheminvest Ltd. v. ITO (121 ITD 318) — Cited in 338 Judgments | BharatTax