What is CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. authority for?

If an assessee possesses interest-free funds exceeding investments in tax-free securities, it is presumed that investments are made from these own funds, precluding disallowance of interest expenditure under Section 14A read with Rule 8D(2)(ii). Additionally, weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) is computed on the gross expenditure incurred, not net expenditure after reducing income earned.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Microlabs Ltd.?

175 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. (383 ITR 490), spanning 2016 to 2026.

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

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 35(2AB), Section 115JB, Section 144C(3), Section 37(1).

CIT v. Microlabs Ltd. (383 ITR 490)

M/S. Matheson Bosanquet Enterprises Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 4(1)(2), Bengaluru

In the result the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1908/BANG/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran & Smt Beena Pillaiita. No. 1908/Bang/2019 Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Matheson Bosanquet The Assistant Enterprises Pvt. Ltd., Commissioner Of Income No. 26/1, Sua House, Tax, Kasturba Cross Road, Circle 4 (1) (2), Bangalore – 560 001. Vs. Bengaluru. Pan: Aabcm9747J (Appellant) (Respondent) For Assessee: Smt. Jinita Chaterjee, Advocate For Revenue : Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. Cit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 30.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 08.10.2021 Order Per Beena Pillai, Jm. Present Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 11/07/2019 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A)-4, Bangalore For Assessment Year 2016-17 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: Tax Effect Relating To Each Ground Of Grounds Of Appeal Appeal (See Note Below) The Assessing Officer Erred In Computing The Disallowance Of Rs.9,68,872/- Uls 14A Of The Income Tax Act Read With Rule 8D(2)(I) 1. Rs. 2,99,381/- ,8D(2)(Ii) & 8D2(Iii) The Assessing Officer While Apportioning The Interest Expenditure Ought To Have Observed That The Investments

For Appellant: Smt. Jinita Chaterjee, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl

Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ents by the group companies in the assessee company more than the investments made by it. There were no disallowance in the previous years. The CIT(A) did not make a reference to and follow the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in CIT Vs Micro Labs 383 ITR 490. The Jurisdictional High Court decision is binding on him. The relevance of Rule 80(1) was not considered. On the facts and the circumstances no disallowance u/s 14A is called for. Brief facts of the case are as under: 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of trading in tea, warehousing and advisory services and had declared income from Bre…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore vs. M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3191/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S. Annamalai, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 14ASection 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(1)(iv)

…by the assessee stand at Rs.4.58 crores only. Admittedly, the own funds available with the assessee is in far excess of the investments made by the assessee. Accordingly, as per decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Micro Labs Ltd. 383 ITR 490, no disallowance out of interest ITA Nos.2848 & 3191/Bang/2018 M/s. Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore Page 10 of 10 expenditure is called for. Accordingly, we confirm the decision rendered by Ld. CIT(A) in deleting this disallowance for the reasons stated above. 24. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the…

M/S Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 2848/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 Oct 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B. R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri S. Annamalai, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Neera Malhotra, D.R

Section 14ASection 35Section 35(1)(i)Section 35(1)(iv)

…by the assessee stand at Rs.4.58 crores only. Admittedly, the own funds available with the assessee is in far excess of the investments made by the assessee. Accordingly, as per decision rendered by Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Micro Labs Ltd. 383 ITR 490, no disallowance out of interest ITA Nos.2848 & 3191/Bang/2018 M/s. Tejas Networks Limited, Bangalore Page 10 of 10 expenditure is called for. Accordingly, we confirm the decision rendered by Ld. CIT(A) in deleting this disallowance for the reasons stated above. 24. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed and the…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1)(2), Bangalore vs. M/S. Bharat Fritz Werner Limited, Bangalore

In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are treated as allowed and all the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 2247/BANG/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Sept 2021AY 2013-14