What is CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A, for expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income, is not permissible when the assessee has not earned any exempt income, such as dividend income under Section 10(34), during the year under consideration.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd.?

470 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. (323 ITR 518), spanning 2012 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 142(1), Section 143(3), Section 8D, Section 143(2), Section 115JB.

CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. (323 ITR 518)

Sodexo Food Solutions India P .Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

Appeal stand partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5707/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5781/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Income Tax-13(2)(1) Private Limited बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Vs. Ramchandra Lane Extension Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.5707/Mum/2016 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2011-12) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax-13(2)(1) बनाम/ 1Stfloor, Gemstar Commercial Complex Room No.146, 1St Floor Ramchandra Lane Extension Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai -400 020 Mumbai-400 064 "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Nimesh Vora, Ld. ARFor Respondent: Rignesh Das, Ld. JCIT-DR

Section 143(3)Section 2(24)(x)Section 36(1)(va)Section 37(1)

…axmann.com 186 Ltd. 6. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 7. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 8. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 9. CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles Ind. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 319 ITR 204 10. CIT Vs Corrtech Energy Pvt Ltd Hon’ble Gujarat High Court 223 Taxmann.com 130 The revenue is unable to bring on record any contrary judgment to controvert the same. Respectfully following the wisdom of higher judicial authorities, we confirm the stand of Ld…

DCIT Cent. Cir. 7(1), Mumbai vs. Rare Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5208/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Ms. S. PadmajaFor Respondent: Shri S.C. Tiwari

Section 14Section 14ASection 2

…. . In view of the aforesaid discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal has no merit and is dismissed in limine". (d) Extract from the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd. 323 ITR 518 (P & H.) "In view of finding reproduced above, it is clear that the expenditure on interest was set off against the income from interest and the investment in the share and funds were out of the dividend proceeds. In view of this finding of fact, disallowance under section 14A was not sustainable. Whether, in a given situation, any expenditure wa…

DCIT Cent. Cir. 7(1), Mumbai vs. Rare Enterprises, Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 5207/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2018AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Shri Pawan Singh

For Appellant: Ms. S. PadmajaFor Respondent: Shri S.C. Tiwari

Section 14Section 14ASection 2

…. . In view of the aforesaid discussion, we do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. The appeal has no merit and is dismissed in limine". (d) Extract from the judgment of Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of Hero Cycles Ltd. 323 ITR 518 (P & H.) "In view of finding reproduced above, it is clear that the expenditure on interest was set off against the income from interest and the investment in the share and funds were out of the dividend proceeds. In view of this finding of fact, disallowance under section 14A was not sustainable. Whether, in a given situation, any expenditure wa…

Sanjeev Kumar Kapoor, Rajgangpur vs. JCIT, Rourkela Range, Rourkela

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 505/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR

Section 10(34)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2011-2012 Sanjeev Kumar Kapoor,, Vs. JCIT, Uditnagar, Barpali, Rajgangpur. Rourkela PAN/GIR No.ABUPK 0291 J (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.R.Mohanty, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Datta, DR Date of Hearing : 27/08/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 27/08/ 2018 O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), Sambalpur dated 4.9.2017 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The sole i…

T.R.Chemicals Ltd., Rajgangpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Rourkela

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 504/CTK/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack27 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri N.S Saini & Pavan Kumar Gadaleassessment Year : 2011-2012

For Appellant: Shri P.R.Mohanty, ARFor Respondent: Shri Subhendu Datta, DR

Section 10(34)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CUTTACK BENCH, CUTTACK BEFORE S/SHRI N.S SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year : 2011-2012 T.R. Chemicals Ltd., Barpali, Vs. JCIT, Uditnagar, Rajgangpur. Rourkela PAN/GIR No.AABCT 1919 M (Appellant) .. ( Respondent) Assessee by : Shri P.R.Mohanty, AR Revenue by : Shri Subhendu Datta, DR Date of Hearing : 27/08/ 2018 Date of Pronouncement : 27/08/ 2018 O R D E R Per N.S.Saini, AM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the CIT(A), Sambalpur dated 4.9.2017 for the assessment year 2011-12. 2. The sole iss…

ACIT, Alwar vs. Vijay Solvex Limited, Alwar

In the result, revenue’s appeal as well as the C

ITA 292/JPR/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur24 Aug 2018AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Mrs. Roshanta Meena (JCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 14ASection 92C

…Shares & Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd (326 ITR 1) that for attracting section 14A, there has to be a proximate cause for disallowance which is its relationship with the tax exempt income. The Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CU Vs Hero Cycles Ltd (323 ITR 518) held that merely because the assessee had incurred interest expenditure on borrowed funds, it would not ipso facto invite the disallowance U/s 14A unless there was evidence to show that such interest bearing funds had been invested in shares which had generated dividend income. Hence disallowance U/s 14A was not sustainable. In the present case,…

Dilip Hari Amdekar, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1709/PUN/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Pune14 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao, Am & Shri Vikas Awasthy, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.1709/Pun/2016 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Shri S.H. AmdekarFor Respondent: Dr. Vivek Aggarwal

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ovisions of Rule 8D. To support his submissions, ld. Authorized Representative placed reliance on the following decisions : 1. Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. 394 ITR 449 (SC) 2. Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT 247 CTR 162 (Delhi) 3. CIT Vs. Hero Cycle Ltd. 323 ITR 518 (P&H) 4. On the other hand, Dr. Vivek Aggarwal representing the Department vehemently defended the impugned order and prayed for dismissing the appeal of assessee. 5. We have heard the submissions made by representatives of rival sides and have perused the orders of the authorities below. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the asses…

DCIT Cir. 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. L & T Power Development Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stand dismissed

ITA 874/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Aug 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No.874/Mum/2017 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14) Dcit Cit 2(2)(1) बिाम/ L&T Power Development Room No. 545, 5 Th Floor, Ltd., Aayakar Bhavan, L&T House, N.M. Road, V. M.K Road, Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400038 स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ Pan : Aabcl3867C (अपीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri. Nishant Samaiya, Dr Assessee By : Shri Govind Jhaveri सुनवाई की तारीख /Date Of Hearing : 09.08.2018 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 09.08.2018 आदेश / O R D E R Per Ramit Kocharthis Appeal, Filed By The Revenue, Being Ita No. 874/Mum/2017, Is Directed Against Appellate Order Dated 09.11.2016 Passed By Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Mumbai (Hereinafter Called “The Cit(A)”), For Assessment Year 2013-14, The Appellate Proceedings Had Arisen Before Learned Cit(A) From Assessment Order Dated 30.11.2015 Passed By Learned Assessing Officer (Hereinafter Called “The Ao”) U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Called “The Act”) For Assessment Year 2013-14. I.T.A. No.874/Mum/2017

For Appellant: Shri Govind JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri. Nishant Samaiya, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…o contrary decision of a High Court has been shown to us. The Punjab & Haryana High Court in CIT v/s Lakhani Marketing Income. IT appeal No 970/2008, dated 02.04.2014, made reference to two earlier decisions of the same Court in CIT V/s Hero Cycles Ltd [2010] 323 ITR 518/189 Taxman 50 (Punj. & Har.) and CIT V/s Winsome Textime Industries Ltd [2009] 319 ITR 204 (Punj. And Har) to hold that Section 14A, cannot be invoked when no exempt income was earned. The second decision is of the Gujarat High Court in CIT V/s Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd. [2014] 223 Taxman 130/45 taxmann.com 116. The third decision is of the Allahab…

DCIT -1(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Tata Lockheed Martinaerostructures Ltd., Hyderabad

In the result , appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed as indicated above

ITA 2667/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. Arati VissanjiFor Respondent: Shri V. Justin,DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…(d) CIT v. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers Private Limited (2009) 310 ITR 421 (Bom) [Affirmed in 326 ITR I (SC)] (e) CIT v. Reliance Industries Ltd. 339 ITR 632 (Bom) (f) CIT v. Metalman Auto P. Ltd. (2011) 336 ITR 434 (P&H) (g) CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. (2010) 323 ITR 518 (P&H) (h) CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. 319 ITR 204 (P&H) (i) Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co Ltd, 328 ITR 81 (Bombay High Court) (j) Wimco Seedlings Ltd. v. DCIT (2007) 107 ITD 267 (Del) (TM) (k) Relaxo Footwears Ltd.,V. ACIT (2012) 50 SOT 102 (DEL); (I) Chanakya International Pvt. Ltd.v. ACIT (2013) 36 CCH 032 (Mum); (m) Justice Ram P…

Sodexo Food Solutions India P Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 304/MUM/2014[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 254

…axmann.com 186 Ltd. 4. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 5. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 6. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 7. CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles Ind. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 319 ITR 204 8. CIT Vs Corrtech Energy Pvt Ltd Hon’ble Gujarat High Court 223 Taxmann.com 130 The revenue is unable to bring on record any contrary judgment to controvert the same. In view of the catena of judgment of higher judicial Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limi…

Sodexo Food Solutions India P.Ltd ( Formelry Knwona S Radhakrishna Hospialality Services P.Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(3), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 7042/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 254

…axmann.com 186 Ltd. 4. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 5. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 6. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 7. CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles Ind. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 319 ITR 204 8. CIT Vs Corrtech Energy Pvt Ltd Hon’ble Gujarat High Court 223 Taxmann.com 130 The revenue is unable to bring on record any contrary judgment to controvert the same. In view of the catena of judgment of higher judicial Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limi…

ACIT 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sodexo Food Solutions India P.Ltd ( Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Services P.Ltd)), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 6864/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Aug 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh, Jm & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am आयकरअपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.304 & 305/Mum/2014 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2002-03 & 2003-04) Sodexo Food Solutions India Deputy Commissioner Of Income Private Limited Tax Range-8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality 2Nd Floor, Aaykar Bhavan बनाम/ Services Private Limited) M.K.Road, Mumbai -400 020 Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.7042/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Sodexo Food Solutions India Assistant Commissioner Of Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor बनाम/ Services Private Limited) Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex Vs. 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn. Mumbai -400 020 Kanchpada, Malad(W) Mumbai-400 064 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No. Aaacr-2547-Q (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" / Respondent) : & आयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A. No.6864/Mum/2012 (िनधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: 2009-10) Assistant Commissioner Of Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limited Income Tax -8(3) बनाम/ (Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Room No.217, 2Nd Floor Services Private Limited) Vs. Aaykar Bhavan, M.K.Road Gemstar Commercial Complex 1St Floor, Ramchandra Lane Extn.

For Appellant: J.D.Mistry, Ld.ARFor Respondent: V.Justin, Ld. DR

Section 143(3)Section 254

…axmann.com 186 Ltd. 4. PCIT Vs Empire Package Pvt. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 81 Taxmann.com 108 5. CIT Vs Lakhani Marketing Inc. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 2015 4 ITR-OL 246 6. CIT Vs Hero Cycles Ltd Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 323 ITR 518 7. CIT Vs. Winsome Textiles Ind. Ltd. Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court 319 ITR 204 8. CIT Vs Corrtech Energy Pvt Ltd Hon’ble Gujarat High Court 223 Taxmann.com 130 The revenue is unable to bring on record any contrary judgment to controvert the same. In view of the catena of judgment of higher judicial Sodexo Food Solutions India Private Limi…

DCIT, C-4(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Punjab Agro Industries Corp. Ltd., Chandigarh

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed

ITA 1320/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh23 Jul 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Smt. Diva Singh & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri. Satish BansalFor Respondent: Shri. Yoginder Mittal

Section 14A

…nce may be restricted to the exempt income. 8. He relied on the following judgments: "Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others vs. CIT (2011) 347 ITR 272 (Delhi HC) and CIT vs Hero Management Services Ltd (2014) 360 ITR 68 (Delhi HC). CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd (2010) 323 ITR 518 (P & H HC) ACIT vs. Iqbal M. Chagla (Mumbai Tribunal). CIT vs. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. (2009) (P & H) (HC) CIT vs. Lakhani Marketing (P & H) (HC), CIT vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd (2014) 45 taxman 116 (Gujrat) (HC), CIT vs. Shivam Motors (Allahabad) (HC). Daga Global Chemicals P vt. Ltd. vs. ACIT (ITAT Mumbai) ITA No. 5592/MUM/2012 Date…

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

…ssioner 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 decisions of the same Court in CIT v. Hero Cycles Limited [2010] 323 ITR 518 and CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 204. The second was of the Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-I v. Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd. [2014] 223 Taxmann 130 (Guj.) and the third of the Allahabad High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur v. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (decision dated 5th May 2014 in ITA No. 88/2014)…

M/S. Uzind Corporation, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3718/DEL/2015[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Jul 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri P. M. Jagtap & Ms. Suchitra Kambleassessment Year : 2007-08 Uzind Corporation, Acit, Circle- 61(1), 305, 3Rd Floor, New Delhi. Prakash Deep Building 7, Vs. Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Ms. Sweety Kothari, CAFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ue relating to the disallowance of Rs.2,47,023/- made u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D to the file of the Assessing Officer for deciding the same afresh by following the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd., 323 ITR 518. As per the direction of the Tribunal, the Assessing Officer decided the issue afresh. While doing so, he found from the books of account and other documents maintained by the assessee that expenditure of Rs.2,89,410/- was incurred by the assessee on account of services charges paid on securities. According to him, this expenditure was relatable…

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 168/KOL/2016[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2004-05

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, ARFor Respondent: Shr P.K.Srihari, CIT

Section 115J

…y in respect of "expenditure incurred." Here the assessee has not incurred any expenditure in relation to dividend income. Hence Provision of section 14A do not apply at all. Assessee has relied on citation of the following cases: 1.CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd [ 323 ITR 518]- P&H High Court 2. Maxopp Investment Limited vs. CIT [(2012)347 ITR 272 (Delhi High Court)] 3. CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 474 (Gujarat High Court) It was held that Rule 8D was not applicable in the AY 2005-06 to 2007- 08.Rule 8D came into existence from 24.03.2008 and hence it was not applicable for the assessment year under co…

Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-8, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1533/KOL/2015[2003-2004]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata06 Jul 2018AY 2003-2004

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri P.M.Jagtap, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm ] Assessment Year : 2004-05

For Appellant: Shri Harakamal Chakravorty, ARFor Respondent: Shr P.K.Srihari, CIT

Section 115J

…y in respect of "expenditure incurred." Here the assessee has not incurred any expenditure in relation to dividend income. Hence Provision of section 14A do not apply at all. Assessee has relied on citation of the following cases: 1.CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd [ 323 ITR 518]- P&H High Court 2. Maxopp Investment Limited vs. CIT [(2012)347 ITR 272 (Delhi High Court)] 3. CIT vs. Torrent Power Ltd. [2014] 363 ITR 474 (Gujarat High Court) It was held that Rule 8D was not applicable in the AY 2005-06 to 2007- 08.Rule 8D came into existence from 24.03.2008 and hence it was not applicable for the assessment year under co…

M/S Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 665/JPR/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur05 Jul 2018AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Jhanwar (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Rai (DCIT)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh fot; iky jkWo] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JM AND SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 665/JP/2017 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13. cuke M/s. Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Ltd., The Principal Commissioner of Vs. A-138, Tonk Road, Gopalpura, Income Tax (Central), Jaipur. Jaipur. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AAACB 7547 E vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri Sandeep Jhanwar (CA) jktLo…

M/S. Federal Mogul Goetze India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 3324/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 14ASection 36(1)(ii)Section 36(1)(iii)

…and not assumed expenditure or deemed expenditure. " It may be submitted that this judgement of the Bombay High Court has been confirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in [326 ITR 1]. ITA No. 3324/Del./2015 6 Similarly, in the case of CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. 323 ITR 518, Hon'ble Punjab & Haryana High Court has held that "if there is no nexus between income earned and expenditure incurred, no disallowance can be made. " We may also refer to the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Sushma Kapoor reported in 2009-TIOL-713-HC-Delhi. Also no disallowance can be made u/s 14A of the Act in an mech…

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)

…ome 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/2014 two earlier decisions of the same in CIT v. Hero Cycles Limited[2010] 323 ITR 518 and CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd.[2009] 319 ITR 204. The second was of the Gujarat High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-I v. Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd. [2014] 223 Taxmann 130 (Guj.) and the third of the Allahabad High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Kanpur v. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (decision dated 5th May 2014 in ITA No. 88/2014).…

CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd.

What is CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. authority for?

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd.

Sodexo Food Solutions India P .Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

DCIT Cent. Cir. 7(1), Mumbai vs. Rare Enterprises, Mumbai

DCIT Cent. Cir. 7(1), Mumbai vs. Rare Enterprises, Mumbai

Sanjeev Kumar Kapoor, Rajgangpur vs. JCIT, Rourkela Range, Rourkela

T.R.Chemicals Ltd., Rajgangpur vs. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Rourkela

ACIT, Alwar vs. Vijay Solvex Limited, Alwar

Dilip Hari Amdekar, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax

DCIT Cir. 2(2)(1), Mumbai vs. L & T Power Development Ltd., Mumbai

DCIT -1(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Tata Lockheed Martinaerostructures Ltd., Hyderabad

Sodexo Food Solutions India P Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT RG 8(3), Mumbai

Sodexo Food Solutions India P.Ltd ( Formelry Knwona S Radhakrishna Hospialality Services P.Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT 8(3), Mumbai

ACIT 8(3), Mumbai vs. Sodexo Food Solutions India P.Ltd ( Formerly Known As Radhakrishna Hospitality Services P.Ltd)), Mumbai

DCIT, C-4(1), Chandigarh vs. M/S Punjab Agro Industries Corp. Ltd., Chandigarh

Rose Financiers & Commercials Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 12(4), Kolkata

M/S. Uzind Corporation, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

DCIT, Cir-11(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd., Kolkata

Haldia Petrochemicals Ltd., Kolkata vs. ACIT, Cir-8, Kolkata

M/S Bhandari Health Care Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Jaipur

M/S. Federal Mogul Goetze India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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