CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd.

323 ITR 518High Court2010#150 most cited

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.

470

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2012 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd. · Section 14A disallowance · no exempt income earned · Section 10(34) dividend · expenditure nexus · disallowance if no dividend income · 323 ITR 518 · Hero Cycles 14A · exempt income disallowance

Also reported as

189 Taxmann 504 ITR-OL 246221 CTR 435

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Hero Cycles Ltd.

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 961/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…assessee has placed reliance on following judicial pronouncements:- [i] CIT vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers 326 ITR 1 (SC); [ii] Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom.); [iii] Maxopp Investment Ltd. 203 Taxman 364 (Del.); [iv] CIT vs Hero Cycles 323 ITR 518 (P&H); [v] CIT vs Metalman Auto P.Ltd. 336 ITR 434 (P&H); [vi] CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom.); [vii] CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd. 339 ITR 632 (Bom.); [ix] CIT vs Ms. Sushma Kapoor 319 ITR 299 (Del). 43. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that looking to the facts of the present case, no disallowance u/s 14A of…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1507/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…assessee has placed reliance on following judicial pronouncements:- [i] CIT vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers 326 ITR 1 (SC); [ii] Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom.); [iii] Maxopp Investment Ltd. 203 Taxman 364 (Del.); [iv] CIT vs Hero Cycles 323 ITR 518 (P&H); [v] CIT vs Metalman Auto P.Ltd. 336 ITR 434 (P&H); [vi] CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom.); [vii] CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd. 339 ITR 632 (Bom.); [ix] CIT vs Ms. Sushma Kapoor 319 ITR 299 (Del). 43. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that looking to the facts of the present case, no disallowance u/s 14A of…

ACIT, Circle- 7(1), New Delhi vs. Decent Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5707/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri Pradip Kumar Kediaassessment Year: 2015-16 Acit, Vs. Decent Financial Circle-5(2), Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. A-86, Dd Shed, Okhla Industrial Area, Phase-I, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacd2899P (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Amit Sharma, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.11.2022 Order Per C.M. Garg, Jm: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 10.04.2019 Of The Cit(A)-3, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2015-16. 2. The Ground Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Reads As Under:- “1. On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(A)Has Grossly Erred In Deleting The Disallowance Made By The Ao U/S 14A R.W. Rule 8D Of The Act Of Rs.1,62,35,930/-. 2. The Appellant Craves Leave To Add, Amend Or Forego Any Ground(S) Of Appeal At Any Time Before Or During The Hearing Of This Appeal.” 3. The Ld. Sr. Dr, Supporting The Assessment Order Dated 26.12.2017 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 (For Short, ‘The Act’) Submitted That The Assessee Had Earned Substantial Dividend Income Of Rs.1,22,16,840/-, Therefore, The Ao Was Right In Making Disallowance U/S 14A Of The Act R.W.R. 8D Of The Income-Tax Rules, 1962 (For Short, ‘The Rules’). The Ld. Sr. Dr Submitted That The Assessee Has Capitalized Substantial Amount Of Interest Paid By Him On The Amount Invested, Therefore, The Amount Of Disallowance Has To Be Calculated Accordingly.

For Appellant: Shri Amit Sharma, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Kumar Pranav, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…shown to us. The Punjab and Haryana High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax, Faridabad Vs. M/s. Lakhani Marketing Inch, ITA No. 970/2008, decided on 02.04.2014, made reference to two earlier decisions of the same Court in CIT Vs. Hero Cycles Limited, [2010] 323 ITR 518 and 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…

Dilip Hari Amdekar, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 12(2), Pune

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is Partly Allowed

ITA 1303/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune03 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote. आयकर अपीलसं. / Ita No.1303/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2012-13 Dilip Hari Ambedkar, The Income Tax Officer, C/O.Ambedkar & Associates, Vs Ward-12(2), Pune. Flat No.302, Jai Ravi Appt. Cts No.1002/44, Rajendranagar, Behind Tendulkar Jogging Track, Navi Peth, Pune – 411030. Pan: Aappa 3065 J Appellant / Assessee Respondent / Revenue Assessee By None Revenue By Shri S P Walimbe – Dr Date Of Hearing 10/08/2022 Date Of Pronouncement 03/11/2022 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-8, Pune, Dated 05.06.2018 For The A.Y. 2012-13 Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961(In Short “The Act”). The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Learned Cit(A) Erred In Upholding The Addition Made By Ao Of Rs.5,49,458/- U/S 14A Read With Rule 8D (Para 3) 2. The Learned Cit (A) Failed To Appreciate That Separate Books Of Accounts For Business & Investments Were Maintained. 3. The Learned Cit (A) Has Failed To Show That Expenditure Is Incurred By The Assesse For Investment.

Section 14ASection 250

…egard to the accounts of the assessee. This recording of satisfaction is a condition precedent in accordance with the law laid down in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co 394 ITR 449 (SC) & Maxopp Investment Ltd 247 CTR 162 (Del); In CIT Vs. Hero Cycle Ltd ( P&B, 323 ITR 518), it was held that “ The expression "expenditure incurred" in s. 14A refers to actual expenditure and not to some imagined expenditure. If no expenditure is incurred in relation to the exempt income, no disallowance can be made u/s 14A” In Maxopp Investment Ltd vs CIT ( Delhi High Court ,***), it was held that “The AO cannot proceed to determine…