CIT v. Essar Tele

401 ITR 445Supreme Court of India2018#471 most cited

What is CIT v. Essar Tele authority for?

Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, read with Section 14A, applies prospectively. It cannot be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09.

198

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. · Essar Teleholdings · Section 14A · Rule 8D · prospective application · disallowance exempt income · AY 2008-09 · Rule 8D applicability · Supreme Court

Also reported as

90 Taxmann.com 2286 Taxmann 435

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 37(1)Section 40(a)(ia)Section 36(1)(viii)

Issues it is cited on

section 115jaemployees contribution to pfsection 114section 36(1)(viia)section 14a(2)section 2(24)(x)section 36(1)(vii)section 80icsection 2(24)section 36(1)disallowance under section 14asection 41

Judgments citing CIT v. Essar Tele

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Rajinder Kumar, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee on quantum for AY 2006-

ITA 3368/DEL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jun 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman & Shri Sudhir Pareek

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridharan, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Shri P. N. Barnwal, CIT DR
Section 132Section 143(2)Section 153A

…n'ble Bombay High Court in Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT, [2010] 328 ITR 81, dated 12.08.2010 (Relevant para 65, 66 & 67, Page 638-676 of case law compendium, Volume 3.2) and the ruling of Hon'ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd., [2018] 300 CTR 561 dated 31.01.2018 (Relevant para: 23 & 48, Page 677-692 of case law compendium, Volume 3.2. These judgements were no doubt in the context of Rule 8D and Section 14A of the Act and not in the context of Notification 91/2008 dated 28.8.2008. However, these judgements have held that the Rules/notifications issued under the fiscal statutes will be, un…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-2(1)(1), Bengaluru vs. Canara Bank, Bengaluru

In the result, revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 716/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 14Section 147Section 14ASection 154

…law framed in ITA 99/2010 are rendered academic and need not be answered. So far as substantial; question of law No.2 in ITA No.97/2010 is concerned, the same is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in 'CIT VS. ESSAR TELEHOLOINGS LTD.',(2018) 401 ITR 445, wherein it has been held that provisions of Section 114A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules are prospective in nature and can not be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09. Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee." ITA No.111/Bang/2024 &…

Canara Bank, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore, Bengaluru

In the result, revenue’s appeal in ITA No

ITA 111/BANG/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Jun 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri Keshav Dubeyassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sri S. Ananthan, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R
Section 14Section 147Section 14ASection 154

…law framed in ITA 99/2010 are rendered academic and need not be answered. So far as substantial; question of law No.2 in ITA No.97/2010 is concerned, the same is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in 'CIT VS. ESSAR TELEHOLOINGS LTD.',(2018) 401 ITR 445, wherein it has been held that provisions of Section 114A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules are prospective in nature and can not be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09. Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee." ITA No.111/Bang/2024 &…

Cesc Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-6(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 2168/KOL/2019[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Mar 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumari.T.A. No.2168/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Cesc Ltd……………………………...........................…………………….……Appellant Cesc House, Chowringhee Square, W.B-700001. [Pan: Aabcc2903N] Vs. Dcit, Circle-6(1), Kolkata………..…..…….…..….........…........……...…..…..Respondent Appearances By: Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Counsel & P. Jhunjhunwala, Advocate, Appeared On Behalf Of The Appellant. Shri S. Datta, Cit-Dr, Appeared On Behalf Of The Respondent. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : February 29, 2024 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : March 05, 2024 Order Per Sanjay Garg: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Assessee Against The Order Dated 14.08.2019 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax Appeals)-20, Kolkata [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘Cit(A)’] Passed U/S 250 Of The Income Tax Act (Hereinafter Referred To As The ‘Act’). 2. The Assessee In This Appeal Has Mentioned As Many As Nine Grounds Of Appeal. However, The Ld. Counsel For The Assessee Has Submitted That As Per The Instructions Of His Client, He Presses For Ground Nos.4, 5 & 6 Only, Which Are Relating To Disallowance U/S 14A Of The Act R.W.R. 8D Of The Income Tax Rules In Respect Of Disallowance Of Expenditure Incurred In Relation To Earning Of Tax Exempt Income I.E. For Proportional Disallowance Of Expenditure Incurred For Earning Of Tax Exempt Income Out Of Total Expenditure Claimed. 3. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessing Officer During The Assessment Proceedings Noted That The Assessee Had Claimed Tax Exempt Dividend Income Of Rs.30,00,000/- But No Amount Was Offered For

Section 115JSection 14ASection 250

…made by the ld. Counsel for the assessee. 7. In this case, the assessment year involved is A.Y 2007-08. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of “CIT vs. Essar Teleholdings Ltd.” 2 I.T.A. No.2168/Kol/2019 Assessment Year: 2007-08 CESC Ltd reported in (2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC) has held that the application of Rule 8D is prospective and the same cannot be applied retrospectively to an assessment year prior to A.Y 2008-09. That disallowance u/s 14A for an assessment year prior to A.Y 2008-09 should be on reasonable basis. Since, in this case, the assessee has already offered suo moto disallowance of Rs.3.52 lakhs an…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle 1(1), Mangaluru vs. Karnataka Bank Ltd., Mangaluru

ITA 963/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…law framed in ITA 99/2010 are rendered academic and need not be answered. So far as substantial; question of law No.2 in ITA No.97/2010 is concerned, the same is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in 'CIT VS. ESSAR TELEHOLOINGS LTD.',(2018) 401 ITR 445, wherein it has been held that provisions of Section 114A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules are prospective in nature and can not be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09. Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee." 5. In this regard, a m…

Karnataka Bank Ltd, Mangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore

ITA 877/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2024AY 2017-18
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…law framed in ITA 99/2010 are rendered academic and need not be answered. So far as substantial; question of law No.2 in ITA No.97/2010 is concerned, the same is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in 'CIT VS. ESSAR TELEHOLOINGS LTD.',(2018) 401 ITR 445, wherein it has been held that provisions of Section 114A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules are prospective in nature and can not be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09. Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee." 5. In this regard, a m…

Karnataka Bank Ltd, Mangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Mangalore

ITA 876/BANG/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore19 Feb 2024AY 2016-17
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…law framed in ITA 99/2010 are rendered academic and need not be answered. So far as substantial; question of law No.2 in ITA No.97/2010 is concerned, the same is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in 'CIT VS. ESSAR TELEHOLOINGS LTD.',(2018) 401 ITR 445, wherein it has been held that provisions of Section 114A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules are prospective in nature and can not be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09. Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of law is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee." 5. In this regard, a…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 2(1)(1), Bangalore vs. Canara Bank, Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 663/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…law framed in ITA 99/2010 are rendered academic and need not be answered. So far as substantial; question of law No.2 in ITA No.97/2010 is concerned, the same is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in 'CIT VS. ESSAR TELEHOLOINGS LTD.',(2018) 401 ITR 445, wherein it has been held that provisions of Section 114A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules are prospective in nature and can not be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09. Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of ITA Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 10 of 31 law is answered against the revenue and in…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 392/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…law framed in ITA 99/2010 are rendered academic and need not be answered. So far as substantial; question of law No.2 in ITA No.97/2010 is concerned, the same is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in 'CIT VS. ESSAR TELEHOLOINGS LTD.',(2018) 401 ITR 445, wherein it has been held that provisions of Section 114A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules are prospective in nature and can not be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09. Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of ITA Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 10 of 31 law is answered against the revenue and in…

M/S. Canara Bank (Erstwhile Syndicate Bank), Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-2(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, appeals filed by assessee and revenue stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 391/BANG/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Dec 2023AY 2019-20

Bench: Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillai

For Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 51

…law framed in ITA 99/2010 are rendered academic and need not be answered. So far as substantial; question of law No.2 in ITA No.97/2010 is concerned, the same is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in 'CIT VS. ESSAR TELEHOLOINGS LTD.',(2018) 401 ITR 445, wherein it has been held that provisions of Section 114A read with rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules are prospective in nature and can not be applied to any assessment year prior to Assessment Year 2008-09. Accordingly, the aforesaid substantial question of ITA Nos. 391, 392 & 663/Bang/2023 Page 10 of 31 law is answered against the revenue and in…

M/S Mfar Developers Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(3), Bangalore

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

ITA 385/BANG/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2017-18

For Appellant: S/Shri C.R. Krishna & Sachin Mehta, CAsFor Respondent: Shri Saravanan B., CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14ASection 32Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37(1)

…ubmitted copy of Supreme Court's judgment in Oil Industry Development Board v. PCIT in support of his claim. It is seen that in this order Supreme Court has simply refused to grant special leave in view of its earlier judgment in CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd 3 SCC 253. As stated in Para 2 and 3 of the judgment Page 10 of 13 in CIT vs. Essar Teleholdings Ltd (2018) 3 SCC 253, the only two questions answered in the judgment were: (i) "Whether sub section (2) and sub section (3) of Section 14A inserted with effect from 01.04.2007 will apply to all pending assessments? (ii) Whether Rule 8D is retrospectively applic…

Elara Capital (India) Private Limited, Mumbai vs. ACIT- Circle 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1569/MUM/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant () & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal () Assessment Year: 2017-18 Elara Capital (India) Pvt. Ltd., The Acit-Circle 6(2)(2), Tower 3, 21St Floor, One Room No. 506, 5Th Floor, Vs. International Center, Senapati Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi Bapat Marg, Elphinstone Karve Road, Mumbai- Road (West), Mumbai-400013. 400020. Pan No. Aabce 6487 B Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Milind DattaniFor Respondent: Mr. P.D. Chogule (Addl. CIT)
Section 14A

…rt dated 16 ble Delhi High Court dated 16.02.2018 by relying 2018 by relying upon its decision in the case of CIT vs Essar Teleholdings s decision in the case of CIT vs Essar Teleholdings s decision in the case of CIT vs Essar Teleholdings Limited (2018 2018) 3 SCC 253. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court had ble Delhi High Court had ruled that, in absence of any exempt income, disallowance u/s ruled that, in absence of any exempt income, disallowance u ruled that, in absence of any exempt income, disallowance u 14A of the Act of any amount was not permissible. In arriving 14A of the Act of any amount was not permissibl…

Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhilai vs. Mesers Metex Engineers, Bhilai

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 247/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश सूद, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़"पया, लेखा सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.238/RPR/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/s Metex Engineers, Vs ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg PAN No. :AAWFM 8852 G AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.247/RPR/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/s Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg PAN No. :AAWFM 8852 G (…

Mesers Metex Engineers, Bhilai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(2), Bhilai

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 238/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 68

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, रायपुर "यायपीठ, रायपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAIPUR BENCH, RAIPUR "ी र"वश सूद, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"ण खोड़"पया, लेखा सद"य के सम" । BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM & SHRI ARUN KHODPIA, AM आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.238/RPR/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/s Metex Engineers, Vs ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg PAN No. :AAWFM 8852 G AND आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.247/RPR/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) ITO, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/s Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg PAN No. :AAWFM 8852 G (…

Mascot Footcare Faridabad Thrg Its Partner Gunjan Lakhani vs. Commissioner of Income Tax Faridabad (Haryana)

The appeals stand dismissed

ITA/192/2012HC Punjab & Haryana12 May 2023

Bench: MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI,MRS. JUSTICE MANISHA BATRA

Section 143(1)Section 14ASection 260Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(iii)

…of the Act is contained in Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 (“the Rules”). Rule 8D had been inserted vide Notification 45 of 2008 and has been held to be prospective in nature i.e. applicable from AY 2008-09. [See CIT vs. Essar Telehodings Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC); Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC).] The Rule 8D has been amended vide Notification No. 43 dated 2nd June 2016. The sub- rule (2) of the amended Rule 8D, as it stands on date and which is effective from AY 2017-18, provides that the disallowance u/s Section 14A is to be computed as an aggregate of the following: 1.Expend…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. M/S Rhc Holdings Private Limited (Earlier Known As M/S Ranbaxy Holding Company)

ITA - 108 / 2023HC Delhi23 Feb 2023
Section 10(34)Section 14A

…1 In this context, Mr Zoheb Hossain, who appears on behalf of the appellant/revenue, does not dispute this aspect of the matter, in view of the judgment rendered by the Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax 5 Mumbai Vs. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (2018) 3 SCC 253. 17. Given the aforesaid position, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order, as according to us, no substantial question of law arises for consideration. 18. This appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Digitally Signed By:PREM MOHAN CHOUDHARY Signing Date:24.03.2023 20:19:53 Signature Not Verified NEUTRAL CITATION NO:2023:DHC:2…

DCIT, C-11(1), New Delhi vs. Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1982/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 40a

…ions: - CIT vs. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers 326 ITR 1(SC) - Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. VS. DCIT: 394 ITR 449(SC) Maxopp Investment Ltd: 347 ITR 272 (Del.)- Affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 402 ITR 640 - CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd.: 401 ITR 445 (SC) - PCIT v. Vedanta Ltd.: [2019] 261 Taxman 179 (Delhi) 32 - H.T. Media Limited v. PCIT: 399 ITR 576 (Del) - Eicher Motors Ltd. vs. CIT: 398 ITR 51 (Del) - PCIT vs. U.K. Paints (India) (P.) Ltd.: 392 ITR 552 (Del.) - CIT v. Abhishek Industries Ltd.: 380 ITR 652 (P&H) - CIT vs. I.P. Support Services India (P) Ltd: 378 ITR 240 (Del) - Joint Inv…

Standard Chartered Finance Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 1(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 8377/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Jan 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (Jm)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14A

…. Vs. DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449, wherein it was held that Rule 8D will apply prospectively from A.Y. 2008-09 onwards. The said view of Hon'ble Bombay High Court has since been upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT Vs. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 445. 10. The Learned DR, on the contrary, submitted that the assessee has earned exempt income and hence disallowance is required to be made under section 14A of the Act. He submitted that the disallowance of Rs.4.03 lakhs would meet the requirements of Sec. 14A of the Act. 11. In the rejoinder, the Ld A.R submitted that the assessee has received on…

Addl CIT RG 8(2), Mumbai vs. Oracle Financial Services Software Ltd ( Formerly Known M.S, I-Flex Solutions Ltd), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 5079/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Oracle Financial Additional Commissioner Services Software Ltd. Of Income Tax, (Formerly Known As I-Flex Range 8(2), Solutions Ltd.), Mumbai Oracle Park, Vs. Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063 Pan: Aaacc1448B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dcit 8(2), M/S. Oracle Financial Room No.216-A, Services Software Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, (Formerly Known As I-Flex M.K. Road, Vs. Solutions Ltd.), Mumbai - 400020 399, Subhash Road, Vile Parle (East), Mumbai – 400 057 Pan: Aaacc1448B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, A.R. &For Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat, CIT D.R
Section 10ASection 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s. Oracle Financial Additional Commissioner Services Software Ltd. of Income Tax, (Formerly known as I-flex Range 8(2), Solutions Ltd.), Mumbai Oracle Park, Vs. Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063 PAN: AAACC1448B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 DCIT 8(2), M/s. Oracle Financial Room No.216-A, Services Software Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, (Formerly known as i-flex M.K. Road, Vs. Solutions Ltd.), Mumbai - 400…

Oracle Financial Services Software Ltd ( Formerly Knwoan As I-Flex Solutions Ltd ), Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is dismissed

ITA 4489/MUM/2010[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Jan 2023AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalassessment Year: 2005-06 M/S. Oracle Financial Additional Commissioner Services Software Ltd. Of Income Tax, (Formerly Known As I-Flex Range 8(2), Solutions Ltd.), Mumbai Oracle Park, Vs. Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063 Pan: Aaacc1448B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 Dcit 8(2), M/S. Oracle Financial Room No.216-A, Services Software Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, (Formerly Known As I-Flex M.K. Road, Vs. Solutions Ltd.), Mumbai - 400020 399, Subhash Road, Vile Parle (East), Mumbai – 400 057 Pan: Aaacc1448B (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ajit Jain, A.R. &For Respondent: Dr. Yogesh Kamat, CIT D.R
Section 10ASection 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “K”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI GAGAN GOYAL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2005-06 M/s. Oracle Financial Additional Commissioner Services Software Ltd. of Income Tax, (Formerly known as I-flex Range 8(2), Solutions Ltd.), Mumbai Oracle Park, Vs. Off Western Express Highway, Goregaon (East), Mumbai – 400 063 PAN: AAACC1448B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2005-06 DCIT 8(2), M/s. Oracle Financial Room No.216-A, Services Software Ltd. Aayakar Bhavan, (Formerly known as i-flex M.K. Road, Vs. Solutions Ltd.), Mumbai - 400…