CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd.

223 Taxmann 130High Court2014#106 most cited

What is CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A read with Rule 8D is not warranted if the assessee has not earned any exempt income in the relevant assessment year.

579

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2014 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. · 372 ITR 97 · Section 14A · Rule 8D · disallowance u/s 14A · no exempt income · exempt income not earned · expenses against exempt income · Gujarat High Court Section 14A · disallowance without exempt income

Also reported as

372 ITR 9745 Taxmann.com 116272 CTR 262

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 1961Section 8DSection 115JBSection 143(2)Section 37(1)Section 250

Issues it is cited on

disallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 14asection 36(1)(iii)section 115jbsection 36(1)section 37section 36section 10previous yearscrutiny assessmentassistant commissioner

Judgments citing CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd.

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 47/MUM/2015[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…s are to be considered on which, dividend has been received during the year. In support, he relied upon following decisions: ACB India Ltd v ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 ACIT u M Baskaran.inITA 1717/M/2013(AY 09-10) CIT u Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd. reported in 272 CTR 262 (Guj) CIT v Holcim India (PJ Ltd. reported in 272 CTR 282 (Del) CIT v Lakhani Marketing Incl. reported in 272 CTR 265 (P&H) 51 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. 118. From the record, we found that in response to show-cause notice issued by the AO, the assessee has contended that no disallowance on account of interest can be made as the assessee has hu…

The Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 47, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 46/MUM/2015[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…s are to be considered on which, dividend has been received during the year. In support, he relied upon following decisions: ACB India Ltd v ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 ACIT u M Baskaran.inITA 1717/M/2013(AY 09-10) CIT u Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd. reported in 272 CTR 262 (Guj) CIT v Holcim India (PJ Ltd. reported in 272 CTR 282 (Del) CIT v Lakhani Marketing Incl. reported in 272 CTR 265 (P&H) 51 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. 118. From the record, we found that in response to show-cause notice issued by the AO, the assessee has contended that no disallowance on account of interest can be made as the assessee has hu…

Asst CIT CC 8(4), Mumbai vs. Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 242/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…s are to be considered on which, dividend has been received during the year. In support, he relied upon following decisions: ACB India Ltd v ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 ACIT u M Baskaran.inITA 1717/M/2013(AY 09-10) CIT u Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd. reported in 272 CTR 262 (Guj) CIT v Holcim India (PJ Ltd. reported in 272 CTR 282 (Del) CIT v Lakhani Marketing Incl. reported in 272 CTR 265 (P&H) 51 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. 118. From the record, we found that in response to show-cause notice issued by the AO, the assessee has contended that no disallowance on account of interest can be made as the assessee has hu…

Asst CIT CC 8(4), Mumbai vs. Phoenix Mills Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, ground No.4 taken by assessee in assessment year

ITA 241/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Oct 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C. Sharma (Am) & Shri Pawan Singh (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 271Section 271(1)Section 271(1)(c)

…s are to be considered on which, dividend has been received during the year. In support, he relied upon following decisions: ACB India Ltd v ACIT reported in 374 ITR 108 ACIT u M Baskaran.inITA 1717/M/2013(AY 09-10) CIT u Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd. reported in 272 CTR 262 (Guj) CIT v Holcim India (PJ Ltd. reported in 272 CTR 282 (Del) CIT v Lakhani Marketing Incl. reported in 272 CTR 265 (P&H) 51 M/s. The Phoenix Mills Ltd. 118. From the record, we found that in response to show-cause notice issued by the AO, the assessee has contended that no disallowance on account of interest can be made as the assessee has hu…

D.C.I.T Cir - 6, Kolkata vs. M/S Integrated Coal Mining Ltd, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Assessee in ITA No

ITA 1758/KOL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata16 Sept 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi

Section 14ASection 43B

…iance in this regard is placed on the following decisions:- • Alliance Infrastructure Projects Pvt Ltd vs DCIT in ITA No. 220 & 1043 (BNG.)/2013 for Asst Years 2009-10 & 2010-11 dated 12.9.2014 (Bangalore Tribunal) • CIT vs Corrtech Energy Pvt Ltd reported in 352 ITR 97 (Guj) • CIT vs Shivam Motors in ITA No. 88 of 2014 dated 5.5.2014 rendered by Allahabad High Court ITA Nos. 1758 & 1804/Kol/13 M/s. Integrated Coal Mining Ltd 8 • CIT vs Lakhani Marketing in ITA No. 970 of 2008 rendered by Punjab & Haryana High Court • CIT vs Delite Enterprises in ITA No. 110 of 2009 rendered by Bombay High Court The decision o…

M/S. Onkareshwar Properties (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee stands allowed

ITA 6164/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Sept 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhua.Y. : 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Jain, CAFor Respondent: None
Section 14A

…CIT Vs. Winsome Textile Industries Limited, [2009] 319 ITR 204 to hold that Section 14A cannot be' invoked when no exempt income was earned. The second decision is of the Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [2014] 223 Taxmann 130 (Guj.). The third decision is of the Allahabad High Court in Income Tax Appeal No. 88 of 2014, Commissioner of Income Tax (Ii) Kanpur, Vs. M/s. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. decided on 05.05.2014. In the said decision it has been held: "As regards the second question, Section 14A of the Act provides that for the purposes of computing the total inco…

Tata Investment Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 2(3), Mumbai

ITA 1398/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Aug 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra & C.N. Prasadआयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita/1398/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Tata Investment Corporation Ltd. Acit-2(3) Elphinstone Building, 2Nd Floor Room No.552, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 10, Veer Nariman Road,Mumbai-1. M.K. Road,Mumbai-400 020. Pan:Aaact 4120 F (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By:Shri Kailash Gaikwad-Dr Assessee By: S/Shri M.M. Golvala & Amey Wagle सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 12.07.2016 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 26.08.2016 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act) लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य राजे"" राजे"" केकेकेके अनुसार अनुसार Per Rajendra, Am- लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य राजे"" राजे"" अनुसार अनुसार Challenging The Order Dated 26.12.2012 Of The Cit (A)-6,Mumbai, The Assessee Has Filed The Present Appeal.Assessee An Investment Company Filed Its Return Of Income On 26.09.2009,Showing Income Of Rs.28.91Crores Under The Normal Provision & Book Profit Of Rs.148.70 Crores U/S.115Jb Of The Act.The Assessing Officer (Ao),Completed The Assessment,U/S.143(3)Of The Act,On 29. 07.2011,Determining The Its Income At Rs.32.25 Crores & At Rs.149.22Crores Under The Mat Provisions.The Assessee Has Filed An Application To Admit Additional Grounds & Has Stated That The Grounds Raised Through The Application Were Legal In Nature.Considering The Fact That Same Deal With Legal Issues,We Allow The Assessee To Argue Them.

For Appellant: S/Shri M.M. Golvala and Amey WagleFor Respondent: Shri Kailash Gaikwad-DR
Section 10(33)Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, मुंबई “ई” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“E”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी. एन एन. "साद "साद,"याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं एवं सी सी एन एन "साद "साद "याियक "याियक सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and C.N. Prasad,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./ITA/1398/Mum/2013,िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Years: 2009-10 आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" वष" Tata Investment Corporation Ltd. ACIT-2(3) Elphinstone Building, 2nd Floor Room No.552, Aayakar Bhavan Vs. 10, Veer Na…

Shantilal Jayavantraj Metha, Navi Mumbai vs. ITO 10(3)(3)(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeals of the assessee are allowed, as above

ITA 2914/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jul 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu

For Appellant: Shri J.B. ShahFor Respondent: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…absence of any tax free incomes, provisions of section 14A of the Act cannot be invoked as held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chemivest Ltd. (supra). The judgment of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT vs. Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd. , 272 CTR 262(Guj) is also on the same line. Under these circumstances, in my considered opinion, the disallowance of Rs.16,50,000 & Rs.17,65,000/-made by the Assessing Officer for the two assessment years under consideration by invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Act is unwarranted and unfounded. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer is directed to del…

Shri Suresh Verma, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1152/DEL/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jun 2016AY 2010-11
Section 132Section 133ASection 143Section 14A

…d CIT Vs. Winsome Textile Industries Limited, [2009] 319 ITR 204 to hold that Section 14A cannot be invoked when no exempt income was earned. The second decision is of the Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-I Vs. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [2014] 223 Taxmann 130 (Guj.). The third decision is of the Allahabad High Court in Income Tax Appeal No. 88 of 2014, Commissioner of Income Tax (II) Kanpur, Vs. M/s. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. decided on 05.05.2014. In the said decision it has been held : “As regards the second question, Section 14A of the Act provides that for the purposes of computing the total inco…

Red Chillies Entertainment P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 29, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 5271/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 May 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Rajesh Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Hiru RaiFor Respondent: Shri B.S. Bist

…decisions:– CIT v/s Delite Enterprises, ITA no.110 of 2009, dated 26th i) February 2009; ii) Cheminvest Ltd. v/s CIT, [215] 378 itr 33 (Del.); iii) CIT v/s Winsome Textile Industries Ltd., [2009] 319 ITR 204 (P&H); iv) CIT v/s Corrtech Energy P. Ltd., [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj.); v) CIT v/s Holcim India Pvt. Ltd., [2014] 272 CTR 282 (Del.); vi) CIT v/s Shivam Motors P. Ltd., [2014 272 CTR 277 (All.); vii) CIT v/s Lakhani Marketing Incl., [2014] 272 CTR 265 (P&H). 31. Learned Departmental Representative on the other hand relied upon the decision of the learned Commissioner (Appeals) and the Assessing Officer. 32.…

Gvn Fuels Limited, Howrah vs. D.C.I.T., Circle - I, Kolkata

In the result, the grounds of appeal of assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2278/KOL/2013[]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata25 May 2016

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, FCAFor Respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin Ansari, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Shri N. V. Vasudevan, JM & Shri M. Balaganesh, AM] I.T.A No.2278/Kol/2013 Assessment Year: 2008-09 GVN Fuels Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, (PAN: AAACG9200D) Cir-1, Kolkata (Appellant) (Respondent) Date of hearing: 17.05.2016 Date of pronouncement: 25.05.2016 For the Appellant: Shri Sunil Surana, FCA For the respondent: Md. Ghayas Uddin Ansari, JCIT, Sr. DR ORDER Per Shri M. Balaganesh, AM: This appeal by assessee is arising out of order of CIT(A)-XXIV, Kolkata vide Appeal No. 1139/CIT(A)-XXIV/C-1/12-13 dated 20.05.2013. Assessmen…

Premier Finance & Trading Co. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

ITA 2862/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 May 2016AY 2008-09
For Appellant: S/Shri Sandeep Jhanwar and Hitendra Bhandari –AR.sFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Bare-DR
Section 254(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…sions:- i. Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 317 ITR (AT) 86 (Delhi) [SB] (para 15) ii. CIT v. Chugandas and Co. [1964] 55 ITR 17 (SC) (para 14) iii. CIT v. Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Ltd. [1965] 57 ITR 306 (SC) (para 14) iv. CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj) (para 15) v. CIT v.Holcim India (P.) Ltd.(I.T.A.No.486 of 2014 decided on 5- 9-2014) (para 15) vi. CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 518 (P&H) (para 15) vii. CIT v. Lakhani Marketing Incl. [2015] 4 ITR-OL 246 (P&H) (para 15) viii. CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC) (para 10) ix.CIT v.Shivam Motors (P.) Ltd. (ITA No. 88…

PAN India Network Infravest P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 7(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 4170/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Niraj Seth-ARFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…sions:- i. Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 317 ITR (AT) 86 (Delhi) [SB] (para 15) ii. CIT v. Chugandas and Co. [1964] 55 ITR 17 (SC) (para 14) iii. CIT v. Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Ltd. [1965] 57 ITR 306 (SC) (para 14) iv. CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj) (para 15) v. CIT v.Holcim India (P.) Ltd.(I.T.A.No.486 of 2014 decided on 5- 9-2014) (para 15) vi. CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 518 (P&H) (para 15) vii. CIT v. Lakhani Marketing Incl. [2015] 4 ITR-OL 246 (P&H) (para 15) viii. CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC) (para 10) ix.CIT v.Shivam Motors (P.) Ltd. (ITA No. 88…

DCIT 7(1), Mumbai vs. PAN India Network Infravest P.Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 3378/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 May 2016AY 2009-10
For Appellant: Shri Niraj Seth-ARFor Respondent: Shri Love Kumar-DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…sions:- i. Cheminvest Ltd. v. CIT [2009] 317 ITR (AT) 86 (Delhi) [SB] (para 15) ii. CIT v. Chugandas and Co. [1964] 55 ITR 17 (SC) (para 14) iii. CIT v. Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Ltd. [1965] 57 ITR 306 (SC) (para 14) iv. CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj) (para 15) v. CIT v.Holcim India (P.) Ltd.(I.T.A.No.486 of 2014 decided on 5- 9-2014) (para 15) vi. CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 518 (P&H) (para 15) vii. CIT v. Lakhani Marketing Incl. [2015] 4 ITR-OL 246 (P&H) (para 15) viii. CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC) (para 10) ix.CIT v.Shivam Motors (P.) Ltd. (ITA No. 88…

Shriram Wealth Advisors Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

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

ITA 407/CHNY/2016[2012-2013]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai05 May 2016AY 2012-2013

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.407/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 M/S Shriram Wealth Advisors Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Mookambika Complex, V. Income Tax, No.4, Lady Desika Road, Corporate Circle 6(1), Mylapore, Chennai – 600 004. Chennai – 600 034. Pan : Aamcs 0723 P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Sh. R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. P. Radhakrishnan, JCIT
Section 14A

…ubmitted that the assessee has not received any dividend income during the assessment year under consideration and there was no fresh investment also. Even though the judgement of Delhi High Court in Chem Investments Limited v. CIT (234 Taxmann 761) and the (45 Taxmann.com 116) were brought to the notice of the authorities below, the Assessing Officer disallowed the claim of the assessee by applying third limb of Rule 8D(2) of the Income-Tax Rules, 1962. According to the Ld. counsel for the assessee, when the assessee has not incurred any expenditure, there is no question of any disallowance. 3. On the contr…

DCIT Cir 3(1), Mumbai vs. Gateway Distriparks Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5746/MUM/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2016AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2010-11 Dcit, M/S Gateway Distriparks Circle-3(1), Ltd. B 1/3, Emca House बनाम/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Sahid Bhagatsingh Marg, Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai- Mumbai-400020 Pan No.Aaacg3425C (राज"व /Revenue) (""यथ"/Respondent)

Section 80I

…[2009] 317 ITR (AT) 86 (Delhi) [SB] (para 15) ii. CIT v. Chugandas and Co. [1964] 55 ITR 17 (SC) (para 14) 16 M/s Gateway Distriparks Ltd. iii. CIT v. Cocanada Radhaswami Bank Ltd. [1965] 57 ITR 306 (SC) (para 14) iv. CIT v. Corrtech Energy (P.) Ltd. [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj) (para 15) v. CIT v. Holcim India (P.) Ltd. (I. T. A. No. 486 of 2014 decided on 5- 9-2014) (para 15) vi. CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. [2010] 323 ITR 518 (P&H) (para 15) vii. CIT v. Lakhani Marketing Incl. [2015] 4 ITR-OL 246 (P&H) (para 15) viii. CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 (SC) (para 10) ix. CIT v. Shivam Motors (P.) Ltd. (IT…

DCIT Cir 3(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Siro Clinpharm P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1493/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2010-11
Section 144Section 14ASection 92C(3)

…ld by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd 319 ITR 204 (P&H), which has been followed by many other Hon’ble High Courts as well, such as Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs Corrtech Energy Pvt Ltd [(2015) 372 ITR 97 (Guj) and by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT [(2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del)]. Respectfully following the views of Hon’ble Courts above, we uphold the grievance of the assessee. The disallowance must stand deleted. I.T.A. Nos. 1269 amd 1493/Mum/2015 Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 5 of 7 8. Ground no. 2 is thus allowed. 9. I…

Siro Clinpharm P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 3(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Assessing Officer is dismissed

ITA 1269/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2016AY 2010-11
Section 144Section 14ASection 92C(3)

…ld by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd 319 ITR 204 (P&H), which has been followed by many other Hon’ble High Courts as well, such as Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs Corrtech Energy Pvt Ltd [(2015) 372 ITR 97 (Guj) and by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd Vs CIT [(2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del)]. Respectfully following the views of Hon’ble Courts above, we uphold the grievance of the assessee. The disallowance must stand deleted. I.T.A. Nos. 1269 amd 1493/Mum/2015 Assessment year: 2010-11 Page 5 of 7 8. Ground no. 2 is thus allowed. 9. I…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dlf Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 3061/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 146Section 250

…Page 1 of 144 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2677/Del./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) M/s. DLF Limited vs. Addl.CIT, DLF Centre, 9th Floor, Sansad Range 10, New Delhi Marg, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN AAACD3494N) Appellant Respondent ITA No.3061/Del./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) Addl.CIT, vs. M/s. DLF Limited Range 10, DLF Centre, 9th Floor, New Delhi Sansad Marg, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN AACD3494N Appellant Respondent Assesse by Shri R.S. Singhvi, Advocate Page 2 of 144 Revenue b…

Dlf Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 2677/DEL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Mar 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri A.T. Varkey & Shri Prashant Maharishi

Section 133ASection 142Section 143(2)Section 144Section 146Section 250

…Page 1 of 144 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘B’: NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI A.T. VARKEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER and SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.2677/Del./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) M/s. DLF Limited vs. Addl.CIT, DLF Centre, 9th Floor, Sansad Range 10, New Delhi Marg, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN AAACD3494N) Appellant Respondent ITA No.3061/Del./2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2006-07) Addl.CIT, vs. M/s. DLF Limited Range 10, DLF Centre, 9th Floor, New Delhi Sansad Marg, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN AACD3494N Appellant Respondent Assesse by Shri R.S. Singhvi, Advocate Page 2 of 144 Revenue b…