CIT v. Shivam Motors

272 CTR 277High Court2014#3718 most cited

What is CIT v. Shivam Motors authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act cannot be made in the absence of any tax-free income earned by the assessee.

32

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2025.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Shivam Motors · Section 14A · disallowance under Section 14A · exempt income · tax free income · expenditure in relation to exempt income · total income

Sections most often in play

Section 14A Section 143(3)Section 253(3)Section 43B Section 8D Section 10 Section 145(3)

Issues it is cited on

section 10(33)section 253(3)dividend distribution tax disallowance under section 14a disallowance u/s 14a section 253 section 43b section 14a section 37 long term capital gain section 10 previous year

Judgments citing CIT v. Shivam Motors

DCIT, RANGE-6, LUCKNOW vs. M/S. U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD.,, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 229/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

…re has been incurred during the said previous year in relation to such income not forming part of the total income.” There is no dispute over the fact that the exempt income earned by the assessee during the year was nil. In the case of CIT vs. Shivam Motors 272 CTR 277 (All)/(2015) 55 taxmann.com 262 (All), it was held by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court that in the absence of tax free income earned by the assessee, the disallowance u/s 14A could not be made. To quote from the aforesaid order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, “10. As regards the second question, s. 14A of the Act provides that for the purposes…

U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD.,LUCKNOW vs. DCIT, RANGE-VI, LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 227/LKW/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

…re has been incurred during the said previous year in relation to such income not forming part of the total income.” There is no dispute over the fact that the exempt income earned by the assessee during the year was nil. In the case of CIT vs. Shivam Motors 272 CTR 277 (All)/(2015) 55 taxmann.com 262 (All), it was held by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court that in the absence of tax free income earned by the assessee, the disallowance u/s 14A could not be made. To quote from the aforesaid order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, “10. As regards the second question, s. 14A of the Act provides that for the purposes…

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 588/LKW/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

…re has been incurred during the said previous year in relation to such income not forming part of the total income.” There is no dispute over the fact that the exempt income earned by the assessee during the year was nil. In the case of CIT vs. Shivam Motors 272 CTR 277 (All)/(2015) 55 taxmann.com 262 (All), it was held by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court that in the absence of tax free income earned by the assessee, the disallowance u/s 14A could not be made. To quote from the aforesaid order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, “10. As regards the second question, s. 14A of the Act provides that for the purposes…

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 587/LKW/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

…re has been incurred during the said previous year in relation to such income not forming part of the total income.” There is no dispute over the fact that the exempt income earned by the assessee during the year was nil. In the case of CIT vs. Shivam Motors 272 CTR 277 (All)/(2015) 55 taxmann.com 262 (All), it was held by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court that in the absence of tax free income earned by the assessee, the disallowance u/s 14A could not be made. To quote from the aforesaid order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, “10. As regards the second question, s. 14A of the Act provides that for the purposes…

DCIT, LUCKNOW vs. M/S U.P. STATE SUGAR CORPORATION LTD., LUCKNOW

In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 485/LKW/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow16 May 2025AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

…re has been incurred during the said previous year in relation to such income not forming part of the total income.” There is no dispute over the fact that the exempt income earned by the assessee during the year was nil. In the case of CIT vs. Shivam Motors 272 CTR 277 (All)/(2015) 55 taxmann.com 262 (All), it was held by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court that in the absence of tax free income earned by the assessee, the disallowance u/s 14A could not be made. To quote from the aforesaid order of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court, “10. As regards the second question, s. 14A of the Act provides that for the purposes…

ANAMIKA CONDUCTORS PVT. LTD. ,JAIPUR vs. ACIT DCIT, JAIPUR

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed with no orders as to cost

ITA 40/JPR/2024[A.Y. 2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur30 Sept 2024

Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta, CAFor Respondent: Shri Anoop Singh, Addl. CIT-DR

Section 145(3)Section 14A

…ase of CIT Vs. Lakhani Marketing Industries (2014) 272 CTR 265 (P&H), Hon'ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 282 (Del). Hon'ble Allahabad High Court decision in the case of Shuvam Motors Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 277 (All) and the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 376 ITR 97 (Guj). Respectfully following the propositions of law laid down in these judicial pronouncements, no disallowance of expenditure is required when there is no income from such investment. Similarly in respect to investment of…

M/S. FIRST LIGHT PROPERTIES P. LTD.(EARSTWHILE KNOWN AS M/S. SUMER BUILDERS P. LTD.),MUMBAI vs. THE DCIT, CC, 5(3), MUMBAI

In the result ground of appeal raised by assessee is dismissed and stand of AO is confirmed

ITA 1768/MUM/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Gagan Goyalm/S First Light Properties Pvt. Ltd. (Erstwhile Known As M/S Sumer Builders Pvt. Ltd.) 205, Commerce House, 140, Nagindas Master Road, For, Mumbai-400023 Pan: Aaacs7947P ...... Appellant Vs. Dcit, Cc-5(3), Room No. 1906, 19Th Floor, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Nishit Gandhi Respondent By : Sh. Sandip Raj, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 29/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 21/06/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M:

For Appellant: Sh. Nishit GandhiFor Respondent: Sh. Sandip Raj, CIT-DR

…(Delhi) 2) CIT vs Lakhani Marketing Inc-(2014) 272 CTR 265 (Punjab & Haryana) 3) CIT vs Winsome Textile Industries Ltd-(2009) 319 ITR 204 (Punjab & Haryana) 4) CIT vs Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd-(2014) 272 CTR 262 (Gujarat) 5) CIT vs Shivam Motors (P) Ltd (2015) 272 CTR 277 (Allahabad) 6) Pr. CIT vs M/s Ballarpur Industries Ltd-ITA No. 51 of 2016 (Bombay) Further the assessee stated that the assessee is having own funds and other non- interest bearing funds exceeding the investments in equity shares and accordingly it is ought to be presumed that the investment made by the assessee is out of interest free funds avai…

HINDUJA FINANCE LTD.,MUMBAI vs. DCIT , RANGE -7(1)(2) (EARLIER DCIT 6(1)), MUMBAI

In the result, this ground of appeal of assessee is dismissed and order of Ld

ITA 7154/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 May 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Shri Gagan Goyalhinduja Finance Ltd. 171, Hinduja House, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli, Mumbai-400018 Pan: Aagca0533R ...... Appellant Vs. Dy.Cit, Range-7(1)(2) Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. ..... Respondent Appellant By : Sh. Ruturaj Gurjar Respondent By : Sh. B.K. Bagchi, Cit-Dr Date Of Hearing : 25/03/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 20/05/2022 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit (A)’] Vide Order Dated 05.09.2019 For The Assessment Year (Ay) 2010- 11. The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal: 1. On The Facts & The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Cit(A) Has Erred In Confirming: I) The Disallowance Made U/S.14A Of The Income Tax Act At Rs.7, 06,985/- As Against Disallowance Of Rs.2, 52,536/- As Computed By The Appellant. The Disallowance Made Of Rs.4, 54,449/- May Please Be Deleted.

For Appellant: Sh. Ruturaj GurjarFor Respondent: Sh. B.K. Bagchi, CIT-DR

Section 14Section 14A

…utual Funds could not quality for disallowance of average investments for the purposes of Rule 8D(iii). In this context, reliance is placed on the Allahabad High Court decision, in the matter of Shivam Motors 4 ITA No. 7154/Mum/2019, AY 2010-11 Pvt. Ltd. - 272 CTR 277. P&H High Court in the matter of Lakhani Marketing Inc. 272 CTR 268. 1.5 Further, reliance is also placed on the Kolkata Tribunal decision rendered in the matter of REI Agro Ltd. - 144 ITD 141, wherein, the Kolkata Tribunal held that -under Rule 8D(2)(iii), what is disallowable amount equal to ½% of the average value of investment the income from…

DY CIT. CC- 1(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. D.B. REALTY LTD., MUMBAI

In the result, the appeal filed by the revenue is hereby ordered to be dismissed

ITA 90/MUM/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2022AY 2017-18

For Appellant: Ms. Pooja RenderFor Respondent: Shri Sanjeev Kashyap (DR)

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…held that, when there is no exempt income declared during the year, no disallowance can be mad. In doing so, the court followed decisions in the cases of Cheminvest Ltd Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) (HC), CIT v Shivam Motors Pvt Ltd (2015) 530 Taxman 63 / 272 CTR 277 (All) (HC), PCIT v Man Infra projects Ltd ITA NO dtd 9-04-2019. 7.10 In case of PCIT v Dish TV India Ltd (Bom) (HC), the Hon‟ble Bombay High court held that when there is no exempt income declared during the year no disallowance can be made. In doing so the Hon‟ble Court followed judgments in the cases of CIT v. Delite Enterprises ITA No 110 of 2…

DY CIT CC-1(4), MUMBAI vs. M/S. MARINE DRIVE HOSPITALITY & REALTY P. LTD., MUMBAI

In the result both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 70/MUM/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Nov 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri M Balaganesh & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale & Dcit, Cc – 1(4), Vs. M/S. Marine Drive 9Th Floor, 902, Pratishta Hospitality & Reality Bhavan, Old Cgo Bldg Pvt Ltd., (Annexe), Mk Road, Ground Floor, Db Mumbai – 400 020. House, Gen. Ak Vaidya Marg, Goregaon (E), Mumbai – 400 063. Pan/Gir No. : Aaccn1891R Appellant .. Respondent

For Appellant: Shri. Suresh Parisamy. DRFor Respondent: Ms. Hema Kataria. AR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…held that, when there is no exempt income declared during the year, no disallowance can be made. In doing so, the court followed decisions in the cases of Cheminvest Ltd v CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Delhi) (HC), CIT v Shivam Motors Pvt Ltd (2015) 230 Taxman 63 / 272 CTR 277 (All) (HC), PCIT V Man Infra projects Ltd ITA NO cIt 9-04 2019. 4.10 In case of PCIT v Dish TV India Ltd (Born) (HC), the Hon'ble Bomby High court held that when there is no exempt income declared during the year no disallowance can be made. In doing so the Hon'ble Court followed judgments in the cases of CIT v. Delite Enterprises ITA No 110 of 2…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. AQUAMALL WATER SOLUTIONS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed in above terms

ITA 2302/HYD/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)

…er dated 16.08.2017 in ITA No.520 of 2017. II. Cheminvest Ltd Vs. CIT - 378 ITR 33 (Del) III. CIT Faridabad Vs. Lakhani Marketing (2014) 272 CTR265 (P&H) IV. Redington (India) Ltd Vs. Add!. CIT(2017) 392 ITR 633 (Mad). V. CIT Vs. Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd.(2014) 272 CTR 277 (Allahabad) 3.2 The AO referring to the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014, dated 11/02/2014, observed that the assessee had incurred interest expenditure of Rs. 8,80,35,300/-. Accordingly, applying rule 8D, the AO computed the disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 2,36,62,633/- u/s 14A and added the same to the total income of the assessee company. 4. When…

DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-1(1), HYDERABAD vs. AQUAMALL WATER SOLUTIONS LIMITED, HYDERABAD

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed in above terms

ITA 2301/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad30 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Smt. P. Madhavi Devi & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu

For Appellant: Shri A.V. RaghuramFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(1)

…er dated 16.08.2017 in ITA No.520 of 2017. II. Cheminvest Ltd Vs. CIT - 378 ITR 33 (Del) III. CIT Faridabad Vs. Lakhani Marketing (2014) 272 CTR265 (P&H) IV. Redington (India) Ltd Vs. Add!. CIT(2017) 392 ITR 633 (Mad). V. CIT Vs. Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd.(2014) 272 CTR 277 (Allahabad) 3.2 The AO referring to the CBDT Circular No. 5/2014, dated 11/02/2014, observed that the assessee had incurred interest expenditure of Rs. 8,80,35,300/-. Accordingly, applying rule 8D, the AO computed the disallowance of expenditure of Rs. 2,36,62,633/- u/s 14A and added the same to the total income of the assessee company. 4. When…

DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE - 2(2) , BANGALORE vs. M/S. ASSETZ INFRASTRUCTURE PRIVATE LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee and revenue are partly allowed

ITA 983/BANG/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore02 Dec 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri B. Sudheendra, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, D.R

Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 36(1)(iii)

…no disallowance u/s 14A is called for. The assessee placed its reliance on the decision rendered by co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s Kingfisher Finvest India Ltd vs. Addl CIT (ITA No.1368/B/2012 dated 17.10.2014), CIT vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd (2014)(272 CTR 277)(All). The AO did not accept the contentions of the assessee and disallowed a sum of Rs.44,89,934/- u/s 14A of the Act. 7.2 However, the Ld CIT(A) accepted the contentions of the assessee and accordingly, he deleted the disallowance made u/s 14A of the Act by following the decision rendered by co-ordinate bench in the case of M/s Kingfisher Finv…

ANAMIKA CONDUCTORS PVT. LTD.,JAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed in part in terms indicated hereinabove

ITA 266/JPR/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur10 Jun 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri G.M. Mehta (CA)For Respondent: Shri P.P. Meena (Addl.CIT)

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 32Section 32(1)

…T Vs. Lakhani Marketing Industries (2014) 272 CTR 265 (P&H), Hon’ble Delhi High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 282 (Del) , Hon’ble Allahabad High Court decision in the case of CIT Vs. Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 277 (All) and the decision of the Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd. (2015) 376 ITR 97 (Guj). Respectfully following the propositions of law laid down in these judicial pronouncements, no disallowance of expenditure is required when there is no exempt income from such investment. 9. Similarly, with respect to…

ASST CIT 6(2)(2), MUMBAI vs. ESSAR HOUSE LTD, MUMBAI

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

ITA 6980/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai04 Apr 2019AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri R. Manjunatha Swamy, D.R

…) deleted the disallowance after taking into consideration the contentions and submissions of the assessee that no disallowance can be made where there is no exempt income by relying on the decision of Lakhani Marketing 272 ITR 265 (P&H –HC) and Shivam Motors 272 CTR 277 (Allahabad). 6. The Ld. D.R. relied heavily on the order of AO by submitting that assessee has made huge investments in the shares and securities and thus might have incurred some expenditure in connection therewith. The Ld. D.R. argued that even if no income was received by way of dividend during the year even then it is quite likely that asses…

DCIT 9(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. FUTURE MARKET NETWORKS LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5234/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Shri Shushil Kumar Poddar

Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…26.02.2009 (Bom.) iii) CIT v/s Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad.); iv) Cheminvest Ltd. v/s CIT, [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del.); v) CIT v/s Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd., [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj.); vi) CIT v/s Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd., [2014] 272 CTR 277 (All.); vii) CIT v/s Lakhani Marketing Inc. [2014] 272 CTR 265 (P&H); viii) ACIT v/s Gini &Jony Ltd., [2018] 172 ITD 472 (Mum. Trib.); ix) ACIT v/s dish TV India Ltd. [2018] 194 TTJ 897 (Mum.); x) DCIT v/s Instant Traders Pvt. Ltd. [2018] 96 taxmann.com 378 (Mum.); xi) DCIT v/s Piramal Realty Pvt. Ltd., [2018] 100 taxmann.com 294 (Mum. Trib.); xi…

DCIT 9(3)(2), MUMBAI vs. FUTURE CONSUMER LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS FUTURE CONSUMER ENTERPRISES LIMITED ), MUMBAI

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5233/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Jan 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Dinkle HariaFor Respondent: Miss Dipika Arora

Section 32Section 32(1)(iii)

…26.02.2009 (Bom.) iii) CIT v/s Chettinad Logistics Pvt. Ltd., [2017] 80 taxmann.com 221 (Mad.); iv) Cheminvest Ltd. v/s CIT, [2015] 378 ITR 33 (Del.); v) CIT v/s Corrtech Energy Pvt. Ltd., [2015] 372 ITR 97 (Guj.); vi) CIT v/s Shivam Motors Pvt. Ltd., [2014] 272 CTR 277 (All.); vii) CIT v/s Lakhani Marketing Inc. [2014] 272 CTR 265 (P&H); viii) ACIT v/s Gini &Jony Ltd., [2018] 172 ITD 472 (Mum. Trib.); ix) ACIT v/s dish TV India Ltd. [2018] 194 TTJ 897 (Mum.); x) DCIT v/s Instant Traders Pvt. Ltd. [2018] 96 taxmann.com 378 (Mum.); xi) DCIT v/s Piramal Realty Pvt. Ltd., [2018] 100 taxmann.com 294 (Mum. Trib.); x…

M/S NCG ENTERPRISES LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ACIT, C-7 , LUDHIANA

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 613/CHANDI/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Jan 2019AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar,C.AFor Respondent: Shri Manjit Singh, Sr.DR

…ni Marketing INC 226 Taxmann 45 (P&H) and also by the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) and further of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 277 (All). In view of this, the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee. Hence, respectfully following the proposition of law laid down by various High Courts, disallowance, if any, made by the lower authorities in this case under the provisions of Section 14A of the Act is ordered to be deleted. 3. In the result, appeal of the asse…

ACIT, C-6, LUDHIANA vs. MAJESTIC HOTELS LTD., LUDHIANA

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 171/CHANDI/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh26 Nov 2018AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri Jagdeep Goel, CIT DRFor Respondent: Shri R.S. Khera, CA

Section 14ASection 250

…ntical proposition had been laid down by the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Holcim India (P) Ltd. (2015) 57 Taxmann.com 28, the Hon'ble (2014) 272 CTR 262 (Guj), the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Shivam Motors (P) td. (2015) 272 CTR 277 (All), the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. (2015) 378 ITR 33(Del) and the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Redington (India) Ltd. (2017) 392 ITR 633. 6. Before us the Ld. DR relied upon the order of the A.O. and stated that the claim of the assessee that it had incurred no expenditure for the purpose of making…

M/S SUNDESH SPRINGS PVT. LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. DCIT, CC-I, LUDHIANA

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

ITA 1611/CHANDI/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh15 Nov 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Dr. B.R.R. Kumarassessment Year: 2010-11

For Appellant: Sh. S.K. MukhiFor Respondent: Sh. Manjit Singh

Section 14ASection 40

…Lakhani Marketing INC 226 Taxmann 45 (P&H) and also by the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) and further of the Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. M/s Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 277 (All) wherein the Hon’ble High Courts have been unanimous to hold that disallowance under section 14A cannot exceed to tax exempt income earned by the assessee. Since for the year under consideration the assessee did not earn any tax exempt income, hence no disallowance on this issue is warranted and impugned addition made on this issue is hereb…

Showing 1–20 of 32 · Page 1 of 2