CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody

115 ITR 519Supreme Court of India1978#191 most cited

What is CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody authority for?

For deductions under Section 57(iii) relating to "Income from Other Sources," an expenditure is allowable if it is laid out wholly and exclusively for the purpose of making or earning such income, even if no income is actually earned in that previous year.

386

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2009 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody · Rajendra Prasad Moody · 115 ITR 519 · Section 57(iii) · Income from Other Sources · deductibility of expenditure · expenses without income · wholly and exclusively · purpose of making income · Section 14A distinction · disallowance of expenses

Sections most often in play

Section 143(3)Section 57(iii)Section 1961Section 14ASection 37(1)Section 68Section 36(1)(iii)Section 143(2)

Issues it is cited on

section 57(iii)section 57disallowance u/s 14adisallowance under section 14asection 14acapital expendituresection 37(1)income from other sourcessection 37salaryprevious yearsection 10

Judgments citing CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody

M/S Sumilon Industries Pvt. Ltd., Surat vs. The Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, Surat

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 87/SRT/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Surat10 Feb 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Pawan Singh, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am आयकरअपीलसं./Ita No.87/Srt/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) M/S Sumilon Industries Pvt. Principal Commissioner Of Ltd. 6-121-A, Vairagini Wadi, Income-Tax-1, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Delhi Gate, Surat-395003 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No.: Aadcs3567 L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Mukund Bakshi, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent By: Shri Ashok B. Koli, Cit-D.R

For Appellant: Shri Mukund Bakshi, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-D.R
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, SURAT BENCH, SURAT BEFORE SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM & DR. A. L. SAINI, AM आयकरअपीलसं./ITA No.87/SRT/2022 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Year: (2017-18) (Physical Court Hearing) M/s Sumilon Industries Pvt. Principal Commissioner of Ltd. 6-121-A, Vairagini Wadi, Income-tax-1, Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Delhi Gate, Surat-395003 Majura Gate, Surat-395001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No.: AADCS3567 L (Appellant) (Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Mukund Bakshi, C.A राज"व क" ओर से /Respondent by: Shri Ashok B. Koli, CIT-D.R सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of Hearing : 20/01/2023 घोषणा की तार…

DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi vs. Hero Solar Energy (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6361/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jan 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandraasstt. Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Vs. Hero Solar Energy Pvt. Ltd. Circle-11(1), 201, First Floor, New Delhi. Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi – 110 020 Pan Aadch1476P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Dr. Rakesh Gupta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Vipul Kashyap, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…owance u/s 14A of the Act without considering a legal principle that allowability/disallowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978) 115 ITR 519?” 3. Brief facts are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of generation of solar energy through its various subsidiaries (SPVs) specifically incorporated for the purpose. It filed its return for AY 2016-17 on 13.10.2016 declaring income of Rs. 3,09,76,320/-. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS. During assessment proce…

ACIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi vs. Biomerieux India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for both the AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15 are dismissed

ITA 4237/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 142(1)Section 14A

…without considering the legal principle that allowability or disallowability of expenditure under the Income-Tax Act, 1961 is not conditional upon the earning of the income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519. c) The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any grounds(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.” 3 ITA Nos.4236 & 4237/Del./2018 3. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of marketing of diagnostic systems (reagents, instr…

ACIT, Circle- 5(1), New Delhi vs. Biomerieux India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue for both the AYs 2013-14 and 2014-15 are dismissed

ITA 4236/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N. K. Billaiya & Ms. Astha Chandra

Section 142(1)Section 14A

…without considering the legal principle that allowability or disallowability of expenditure under the Income-Tax Act, 1961 is not conditional upon the earning of the income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519. c) The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any grounds(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal.” 3 ITA Nos.4236 & 4237/Del./2018 3. Briefly stated, the facts are that the assessee company is engaged in the business of marketing of diagnostic systems (reagents, instr…

Jitf Urban Infrastructure Services Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle-13(2), New Delhi

ITA 6632/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6632/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 M/S. Jitf Urban Infrastructure Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Services Limited Tax 28, Shivaji Marg, West Delhi, Circle 13(2), Central Revenue P.O: Ramesh Nagar Building Room No. 316A 3Rd Floor, New Delhi- 110015 Pan : Aaccj4785G I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2

…5,465/- to Rs. 6,40,890/- by not considering a legal principle that allowability /disallowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the income as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CITvs Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519? 2. Whether CIT(A) is justified on facts and law in restricting the disallowance made under section 14A ignoring that the rule laid down by section 14A r.w. Rule 8D implies presumptive taxation and calculation of disallowance as per rule 8D is natural ITA No. 6632, 6423/Del/2018 JITF Urban Infrastructure Services Ltd, New Delhi 7 corollary t…

DCIT, Circle-13(2), New Delhi vs. Jitf Urban Infrastructure Services Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 6423/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Jan 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No.6632/Del/2018, A.Y. 2015-16 M/S. Jitf Urban Infrastructure Vs. Asst. Commissioner Of Income Services Limited Tax 28, Shivaji Marg, West Delhi, Circle 13(2), Central Revenue P.O: Ramesh Nagar Building Room No. 316A 3Rd Floor, New Delhi- 110015 Pan : Aaccj4785G I.P.Estate, New Delhi-110002

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2

…5,465/- to Rs. 6,40,890/- by not considering a legal principle that allowability /disallowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the income as held by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CITvs Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519? 2. Whether CIT(A) is justified on facts and law in restricting the disallowance made under section 14A ignoring that the rule laid down by section 14A r.w. Rule 8D implies presumptive taxation and calculation of disallowance as per rule 8D is natural ITA No. 6632, 6423/Del/2018 JITF Urban Infrastructure Services Ltd, New Delhi 7 corollary t…

Mahakalp Arogya Prathisthan, Mumbai vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 17(2)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assesse is allowed

ITA 2368/MUM/2022[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2023AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Amarjit Singh & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopalmahakalp Arogya Vs. Income Tax Officer, Pratisthan, Bajaj Bhavan Ward 17(2)(1) 2Nd Floor, Jamnalal Bajaj Kautilya Bhavan, Marg, 226 Nariman C-41 To C-43, G Block, Point, Mumbai Bandra Kurla Complex 400021 Bandra (East) Mumbai - 400051 स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No: Aaatm2595C Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Vasanti B. Patel Respondent By : Anil Sant

For Appellant: Vasanti B. PatelFor Respondent: Anil Sant
Section 11Section 57Section 57(3)

…the residual head full play must be allowed to s. 57(1). Though prima facie it would appear that the phraseology employed in s. 57(1) is different from s. 37(1). It has been held by the Supreme Court in CIT us. Rajendra Prasad Moody 1978 CTR (SC) 141: (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC) that s. 57(1) must be construed broadly and the somewhat wider language of s. 37(1) should not affect the interpretation of s. 57(111). The assessee in the present case was created in 1979 with the object of promoting sports; there was no other object and all its constituents were giving grants/funds only for that purpose. In truth and reali…

Uti Assest Managmeent Company Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 14(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5829/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyal

For Appellant: Sh. J.D. Mistry / Sh. Ninad Patade, ARFor Respondent: Sh. Vranda U Matkarni, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 250

…of management fee and other expenses amounting to Rs 3,75,79,106/- for AY 2012-13 and Rs 4,09,41,230/- for AY 2013-14. To substantiate its claim assessee relied upon the decision of the honourable apex court in the case of CIT vs Rajendra Prasad Moody (1978) 115 ITR 519 (S.C) , wherein it was observed that the deduction of the expenditure cannot be held to be conditional upon the making or earning of the income. 8. With due regard to the decision laid down by the honourable Apex court (supra) is not applicable to the facts of the case as the same was rendered with reference to income under the head business and…

M/S. Neptune Estate, Vadodara vs. The DCIT, Circle-1(2), Vadodara

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 455/AHD/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad21 Dec 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble

For Appellant: Ms. Amrin Pathan, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Alpesh Parmar, Sr. D.R
Section 57

…much higher than the interest rate of Dena Bank. The Ld. A.R. submitted that the Assessing Officer has computed the hypothetical income of Rs. 8,69,062/-. The Ld. A.R. relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody 115 ITR 519 (SC) as well as CIT vs. Excel Industries Ltd. 358 ITR 295. 6. The Ld. D.R. submitted that the expenditure of interest claimed by the assessee is much more higher and in excess and the CIT(A) has rightly observed that the loan from Dena Bank as well as Bajaj Finserve was never utilized for any business activity of the assessee itself and the loan…

Mseb Holding Company Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT (Hq) (Judl) to the CIT 14, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

ITA 3374/MUM/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 253(3)Section 263

…also not necessary that profits should be earned by each and every expenditure. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: Reliance was placed on the following decisions: Reliance was placed on the following decisions: - i. CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [115 ITR 419 (SC.)) CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [115 ITR 419 (SC.)) CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [115 ITR 419 (SC.)) ii. R.B. Bansilal Abirchand Spg. & Wug. Mills v. CIT (81 ITR 34 . Bansilal Abirchand Spg. & Wug. Mills v. CIT (81 ITR 34 . Bansilal Abirchand Spg. & Wug. Mills v. CIT (81 ITR 34 (Bom.) (FB) (Bom.) (FB) iii. F. E. Dinshaw Ltd. v. CIT (36 ITR 11…

Mseb Holding Company Limited, Mumbai vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax 1, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee

ITA 1181/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey () & Shri Om Prakash Kant () Assessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Mr. Ketan Ved, ARFor Respondent: Mr. T. Shankar, CIT-DR
Section 253(3)Section 263

…also not necessary that profits should be earned by each and every expenditure. Reliance was placed on the following decisions: Reliance was placed on the following decisions: Reliance was placed on the following decisions: - i. CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [115 ITR 419 (SC.)) CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [115 ITR 419 (SC.)) CIT v. Rajendra Prasad Moody [115 ITR 419 (SC.)) ii. R.B. Bansilal Abirchand Spg. & Wug. Mills v. CIT (81 ITR 34 . Bansilal Abirchand Spg. & Wug. Mills v. CIT (81 ITR 34 . Bansilal Abirchand Spg. & Wug. Mills v. CIT (81 ITR 34 (Bom.) (FB) (Bom.) (FB) iii. F. E. Dinshaw Ltd. v. CIT (36 ITR 11…

ITO Ward - 16(3), New Delhi vs. Masterway Consultants Limited, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 484/DEL/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Nov 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Dr. B. R. R. Kumar & Sh. Yogesh Kumar U.S.I.T.A. No. 484/Del/2021 (A.Y 2015-16)

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)

…owance u/s 14A of the Act without considering a legal principle that allow ability/disallowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the income as upheld by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody[1978] 115 ITR 519? 3. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 15,56,346/- out of Rs. 6,09,19,027/- made on account of disallowance of interest expenses which is not part of business expenditure. 3. Brief facts of the case are that, the return of income declaring loss of Rs. 2,32,68,999/- wa…

National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, Range- 18, New Delhi

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

ITA 1148/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedia N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Aman Garg, C. AFor Respondent: [CIT] – D. R
Section 43B

…41/Del/2018 14A of the Act without considering legal principle that allowability or disallowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 and without considering ratio decidendi as upheld in cases of CIT Vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd [2010] 326 ITR 1 (SC) and Maxopp Investment Vs CIT [2012] 347 ITR 272 (Delhi) on application of provisions of section 14A of the Act? 9. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, Ld CIT (A) is legally justified in deleting disallo…

ACIT, Circle- 17(2), New Delhi vs. National Fertilizers Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1041/DEL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Nov 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedia N D Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad

For Appellant: Shri Aman Garg, C. AFor Respondent: [CIT] – D. R
Section 43B

…41/Del/2018 14A of the Act without considering legal principle that allowability or disallowability of expenditure under the Act is not conditional upon the earning of the income as upheld by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case CIT Vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody [1978] 115 ITR 519 and without considering ratio decidendi as upheld in cases of CIT Vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd [2010] 326 ITR 1 (SC) and Maxopp Investment Vs CIT [2012] 347 ITR 272 (Delhi) on application of provisions of section 14A of the Act? 9. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, Ld CIT (A) is legally justified in deleting disallo…

Asstt Commissioner of Income Tax, CC-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd .(Successor to M/S Sahajanad Hi-Tech Construction Pvt Ltd.), Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

ITA 1893/MUM/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

For Appellant: Shri. Gunajjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri. Nishant Somaiya SRAR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor to M/s Sahajanad ACIT CC-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. ROOM NO. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4TH Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No.AAECP1936F ACIT CC-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room no. 655, (Successor to Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, C…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-7(3), Mumbai vs. M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

ITA 1885/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

For Appellant: Shri. Gunajjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri. Nishant Somaiya SRAR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor to M/s Sahajanad ACIT CC-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. ROOM NO. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4TH Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No.AAECP1936F ACIT CC-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room no. 655, (Successor to Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, C…

Macrotech Developers Ltd(Successor to Bellissimo Developers Thane Private Limited), Mumbai vs. Dy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 7(3) (Formerly Income Tax Officer, Ward 6(3)(2)), Mumbai

In the result, for A.Y. 2015-16, the appeal of the learned

ITA 1864/MUM/2022[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Oct 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Shri Rahul Chaudhary, Jm M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor To M/S Sahajanad Acit Cc-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. Room No. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4Th Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aaecp1936F Acit Cc-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room No. 655, (Successor To Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D ‘Ita No. 1864/Mum/2022 (Assessment Year 2015-16) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Dcit, (Successor To Bellissimo Central Circle 7(3) Developers Thane Private Room No. 655, 6 Th Floor, Limited) 412, Floor-4, 17G Aaykar Bhavan, Vs. Vardhman Chamber, Cawasji, M. K. Road, Patel Road, Horniman Circle, Mumbai-400 021 Fort, Mumabi-400 001 (Respondent) (Appellant) Pan No.Aadco0409D

For Appellant: Shri. Gunajjan KakkadFor Respondent: Shri. Nishant Somaiya SRAR
Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “F” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, AM AND SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JM M/S Macrotech Developers Ltd. (Successor to M/s Sahajanad ACIT CC-7(3) Hi-Tech Construction Pvt. ROOM NO. 655, Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 412,4TH Floor, 17-G, Vs. M.K.Road, Vardhaman Chambers, Mumbai- 400 020 Cawasji Patel Road, Horniman Cirlce, Fort, Mumbai-400001 (Respondent) (Appellant) PAN No.AAECP1936F ACIT CC-7(3) Macrotech Developers Ltd. Room no. 655, (Successor to Bellissimo Aayakar Bhavan, Developers Thane Private Limited) M.K.Road, 412, Floor-4, 17G Vs. Mumbai- 400 020 Vardhman Chamber, C…

ITO - 4(2)(4), Mumbai vs. M. W. Corp. Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

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

ITA 6689/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Aby T Varkey & Shri Gagan Goyalito-4(2)(4), Room No. 647, 6Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Mumbai-400020. ...... Appellant Vs. M/S M.W.Corp. Pvt. Ltd. 99, Niranjan, Marine Drive, Marine Lines, Mumbai-400002. Pan: Aafcm1365G ..... Respondent Appellant By : Smt. Mahita Nair- Cit(Dr) Respondent By : None Date Of Hearing : 25/07/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/10/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeals)-9, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As [‘Cit(A)’] Dated 14.09.2017 Passed Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As [‘The Act’] For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2012-13. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Smt. Mahita Nair- CIT(DR)For Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 56

….Corp. Pvt. Ltd. 9. In its support, assessee relied upon the following case laws of honourable Supreme Court, High Courts and coordinate benches of ITAT as under: i. Western express Industries Ltd vs ACIT (ITA NO 3013/M/2012) ii. CIT Vs Rajendra Prasad Moody 115 ITR 519(S.C). iii. Daljit Exports (India) Pvt Ltd Vs ITO 36 ITD 0305. iv. CIT. Vs Lohore Electricity Supply Co Ltd [60 ITR 1(S.C)] v. L.Ve. Vairavan Chettiar Vs CIT (Mad) 72 ITR 0114. 10. As observed supra this is not the first year of operation of the assessee and previous years results were also assessed under scrutiny and assessee declared income unde…

M/S Well Wisher Construction Pvt Ltd., Navi Mumbai vs. DCIT Ward 18 (1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 7605/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Rahul Chaudhary

For Appellant: Shri Khushiram JadhwaniFor Respondent: Shri Tushar Mohite, Sr.D.R

…assessee also pointed out that the Assessing Officer himself has accepted that the assessee is engaged in real estate activity. Ld. counsel further referred to judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Rajendra Prasad Moody, (1978) 115 ITR 519 (SC) and contends that claim of depreciation allowances and other business expenditure would not be disqualified for deduction merely on the ground that no income resulted from such expenditure particular assessment year. A reference was made to the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of M/s. Multi Act Reality Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. vs.…

ACIT, Circle-12(2), New Delhi vs. Insitel Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 8505/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Sept 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Sh. Shamim Yahya & Sh. Anubhav Sharmaita No. 8196/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16

Section 143(3)Section 271(1)(c)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI (DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SH. SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 8196/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 M/s. Instel Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income- 203, South Ex-Plaza 1, tax , South Extension Part-II, Circle-12(2), South Delhi-110049 New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA No. 8505/Del/2019, A.Y. 2015-16 Assistant Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Instel Services Pvt. Ltd., Income-tax , 203, South Ex-Plaza 1, Circle-12(2), South Extension Part-II, New Delhi South Delhi-110049 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Assessee…