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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Essar Tele?

198 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Essar Tele (401 ITR 445), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Essar Tele come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 36(1)(vii), Section 115JB, Section 143(3), Section 36(1)(viia), Section 37(1).

CIT v. Essar Tele (401 ITR 445)

Sri Rajanikanth Reddy, Bengaluru vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-4(2)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 774/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Oct 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Miss. Sunaina Bhatia, CAFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143Section 143(1)Section 154Section 234BSection 36Section 43B

…nefit of community as a whole, even in the absence of a provision the statute may be held to be retrospective in nature. However, we are confronted with any such situation here……” 7.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC) considered the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Gold Coins Health Foods (P.) Ltd. (supra) and also the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Vatika Township P. Ltd. (supra). The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (supra), held that judgment in the ca…

Aachman Vanijya Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT, Central Circle-8 (4), Mumbai

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

ITA 1510/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: HeardITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/S Aachman Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., Dcit, Central Circle-8(4), Main Building, 2Nd Floor, Kolkata, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, West Bengal-700 001. Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aacca 5165 H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : None Revenue By : Ms. Shailja Rai, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 24/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 28/09/2022

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Shailja Rai, CIT-DR

Section 132Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “A” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI KULDIP SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI OM PRAKASH KANT (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2016-17 & Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s Aachman Vanijya Pvt. Ltd., DCIT, Central Circle-8(4), Main Building, 2nd floor, Kolkata, 6th floor, Aayakar Bhavan, West Bengal-700 001. Vs. M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. PAN No. AACCA 5165 H Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by : Ms. Shailja Rai, CIT-DR Date of Hearing : 24/08/2022 Date of pronouncement : 28/09/2022 ORDER PER OM PRAKASH KANT, AM These Appeals by the assessee are directed against two…

D.C.I.T., CC-2(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Vikram Power Ventures Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2528/KOL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata22 Sept 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Manish Borad, Hon’Ble & Shri Sonjoy Sarma, Hon’Bleassessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Cc-2(2), Kolkata M/S. Vikram Power Ventures Pvt. Ltd. 4Th Floor, Tobacco House, Vs. 1, Old Court, House Corner, Kolkata – 700001. [Pan: Aadcv 9743 R] (Appellant) (Respondent) Present For: Assessee By : Shri A.K. Tibrewal, Ca Revenue By : Shri Partha Pratim Barman, Acit Date Of Hearing : 25.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 22.09.2022 O R D E R Per Sonjoy Sarma, Jm: The Present Appeal Has Been Preferred By The Revenue Against The Order Dated 11.09.2019 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’]. The Revenue In This Appeal Has Taken The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “I. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata Has Erred In Law To Hold That Disallowances U/S 14A Read With 8D For The A.Y. 2016- 17 Will Not Apply Where No Exempt Income In Received Or Receivable During The Relevant Previous Year By Ignoring The Provision Of Rule 8D That Provides For Computation Of Expenditure In Respect Of Not Only Those Investments, Income From Which Does Not Form Part Of Total Income But Also Those Investments, Income From Which Shall Not Form Part Of Total Income. Ii. That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A), Kolkata Has Erred In Law In Deciding That Disallowance U/S 14A Read With Rule 8D Cannot Be Made In A Year In Which No Exempt Income Has Been Earned Or Received By The Assessee Without Considering The Cbdt’S Circular No. 03/2018 Dated 11.07.2018 & Correct Computation Under Rule 8D.

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Tibrewal, CAFor Respondent: Shri Partha Pratim Barman, ACIT

Section 14Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 250

…CIT vs Oil Industry Development Board (SLP Civil No. 2755/2019) has dismissed the SLP filed by the revenue against the judgement of Hon’ble Delhi High Court dated 16.02.2018 by relying upon the decision in the case of CIT vs Essar Teleholdings Limited (2018) 3 SCC 253. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court had rules that, in absence of any exempt income, disallowance u/s 14A of the Act of any amount was not permissible. In arriving at this conclusion, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court had relied upon its earlier decision in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs CIT (378 ITR 33). The above proposition of law has been well accepted by…

Mr. G R Chandrashekar Naidu, Bengaluru vs. Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC, Bangalore

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

ITA 677/BANG/2022[2020-21]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore06 Sept 2022AY 2020-21

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

For Appellant: Smt.Suman Gala Ranga, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.R.Narayanan, Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(va)Section 43B

…nefit of community as a whole, even in the absence of a provision the statute may be held to be retrospective in nature. However, we are confronted with any such situation here……” 7.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC) considered the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Gold Coins Health Foods (P.) Ltd. (supra) and also the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Vatika Township P. Ltd. (supra). The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (supra), held that judgment in the ca…

DCIT, Circle- 21(1), New Delhi vs. Religare Enterprises Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, revenue’s appeal is dismissed and cross-objection

ITA 7552/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: HeardITAT Delhi29 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia:Assessment Year: 2014-15 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Religare Enterprises Income-Tax, Circle-21(1), Ltd., 2Nd Floor, Rajlok New Delhi Building, 24-Nehru Place, New Delhi-110019 Pan :Aaacv5888N (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…vs. DOT: 394 ITR 449 (SC); 13 ITA No. 7552 & CO. 27/Del./2018 • Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT: 402 ITR 640 (SC) 12. Specific reliance is placed on the following observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC), wherein the SupremeCourt, while holding Rule 8D of the rules to be prospective in nature, observed as under: (Refer Pages 134 -161 @ 144,147,154,155 of CLPB II): “This court in the above case held that rule IBB shall be applicable even prior to the enforcement of the rule holding that the said rule merely provides a choice amongst well- kno…

The Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1(1)(1), Ahmedabad vs. Applitech Solution Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 247/AHD/2020[2001-02]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad05 Aug 2022AY 2001-02

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice- & Shri Siddhartha Nautiyal

For Appellant: Shri Anil Kshatriya &For Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT-DR &

Section 133ASection 143(1)Section 148

…3.2008 are not retrospective in nature and shall apply with effect from A.Y.2008-09. I have also gone through the case laws relied by the appellant (P.B.P.34). Recently the Hon'ble Supreme Court in a case of CIT Vs. Essar Technoholdings Ltd reported in [2018] 401 ITR 445 has held that applying the principle of statutory interpretation for interpreting retrospectivity of a fiscal statute and looking into the nature and purpose of section 14A(2) & (3) as well as purpose and intent of Rule 8D coupled with the explanatory notes in the Fin. Bill, 2016 & the department's understanding as reflected by circular dated 28.…

Poonawalla Shares & Securities Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Wealth-Tax, Circle-4, Pune

Appeal is partly allowed in above terms

ITA 380/PUN/2020[2016/17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune29 Jul 2022

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.380/Pun/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner Of Income 16-B,/1, Sarosh Bhavan, Tax, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Circle-4, Pune. Pune – 411001 Pan: Aaacp 6087 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee By Shri Percy Pardiwala – Ar Revenue By Shri M.G.Jasnani – Dr Date Of Hearing 08/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 29/07/2022 आदेश/ Order Per S.S.Godara, Jm: This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2016-17 Is Directed Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-3, Pune’S Order Dated 11.12.2019 Passed In Case No.Pn/Cit(A)-3/Cir 4/193/2018-19/428, In Proceedings U/S.143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 [In Short “The Act”].

Section 143(3)Section 14A

….आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “बी” "ायपीठ पुणे म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH, PUNE BEFORE SHRI S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपीलसं. / ITA No.380/PUN/2020 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2016-17 Poonawalla Shares & Securities The Assistant Pvt. Ltd., Vs Commissioner of Income 16-B,/1, Sarosh Bhavan, Tax, Dr.Ambedkar Road, Circle-4, Pune. Pune – 411001 PAN: AAACP 6087 H Appellant/ Assessee Respondent /Revenue Assessee by Shri Percy Pardiwala – AR Revenue by Shri M.G.Jasnani – DR Date of hearing 08/07/2022 Date of pronouncement 29/07/2022 आदेश/ ORDER Per S.S.…

Datacorp Traffic Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 502/BANG/2022[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Veena V.H., CAFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., , Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…nefit of community as a whole, even in the absence of a provision the statute may be held to be retrospective in nature. However, we are confronted with any such situation here……” 7.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC) considered the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Gold Coins Health Foods (P.) Ltd. (supra) and also the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Vatika Township P. Ltd. (supra). The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (supra), held that judgment in the ca…

Datacorp Traffic Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore

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

ITA 501/BANG/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore20 Jul 2022AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Am

For Appellant: Ms.Veena V.H., CAFor Respondent: Sri.Narayana K.R., , Addl.CIT-DR

Section 139(1)Section 143(1)Section 36Section 36(1)(va)Section 40Section 43B

…nefit of community as a whole, even in the absence of a provision the statute may be held to be retrospective in nature. However, we are confronted with any such situation here……” 7.4 The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (2018) 401 ITR 445 (SC) considered the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Gold Coins Health Foods (P.) Ltd. (supra) and also the judgment of the Larger Bench of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Vatika Township P. Ltd. (supra). The Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd. (supra), held that judgment in the ca…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -1(1), Pune vs. M/S. Cummins Sales & Services (I), Ltd, (Formerly Known As Cummins Diesels Sales & Service Ltd, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue stands partly allowed

ITA 2121/PUN/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Pune27 Jun 2022AY 2006-07

For Appellant: Shri Ketan VedFor Respondent: Shri Shivraj B. Morey

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 72ASection 72A(4)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2121/PUN/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2006-07 DCIT, Circle- 1(1), Pune. Vs. M/s. Cummins Sales & Services (I) Ltd. (Formerly known as Cummins Diesels Sales & Services Ltd.), 35A/1/2, Erandwane, Pune- 411038. PAN : AAACC7262K Appellant Respondent Revenue by : Shri Shivraj B. Morey Assessee by : Shri Ketan Ved Date of hearing : 02.06.2022 Date of pronouncement : 27.06.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed…

Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cent Cir -1(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 93/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR

Section 14A

…issued on 2nd June 2016, the impugned A.Y. 2016-17. Therefore, this amendment invoke by the learned CIT (A) for A.Y. 2016- 17 is not proper. For this proposition, he relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Essar Teleholding Limited 401 ITR 445 (SC), wherein it has ITA Nos. 92, 93 & 15/Mum/2022 Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd; A.Y. 16-17 & 17–18 been held the amended rules cannot be applied retrospectively. (v) He therefore submitted that enhancement made by the learned CIT (A) by invoking the amended Rule 8D of the Rules is incorrect. 08. The learned Departmental Representative vehe…

Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Central Cir-1(2), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 92/MUM/2022[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR

Section 14A

…issued on 2nd June 2016, the impugned A.Y. 2016-17. Therefore, this amendment invoke by the learned CIT (A) for A.Y. 2016- 17 is not proper. For this proposition, he relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Essar Teleholding Limited 401 ITR 445 (SC), wherein it has ITA Nos. 92, 93 & 15/Mum/2022 Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd; A.Y. 16-17 & 17–18 been held the amended rules cannot be applied retrospectively. (v) He therefore submitted that enhancement made by the learned CIT (A) by invoking the amended Rule 8D of the Rules is incorrect. 08. The learned Departmental Representative vehe…

Eldelweiss Securities Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle 4(1) (1), Mumbai

The appeal is allowed

ITA 15/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai23 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Ravikant Pathak, ARFor Respondent: Shri Amol Kirtane, CIT DR

Section 14A

…issued on 2nd June 2016, the impugned A.Y. 2016-17. Therefore, this amendment invoke by the learned CIT (A) for A.Y. 2016- 17 is not proper. For this proposition, he relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT Vs. Essar Teleholding Limited 401 ITR 445 (SC), wherein it has ITA Nos. 92, 93 & 15/Mum/2022 Edelweiss Financial Services Ltd; A.Y. 16-17 & 17–18 been held the amended rules cannot be applied retrospectively. (v) He therefore submitted that enhancement made by the learned CIT (A) by invoking the amended Rule 8D of the Rules is incorrect. 08. The learned Departmental Representative vehe…