CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd.

DCIT(Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. C&S Electric Ltd, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed while appeal filed

Bench: Shri P.K.Bansal & Sh. Amit Shuklac & S Electric Ltd., Vs Dcit Ltu, (Formerly Known As Controls & Switchgear New Delhi. Co.Ltd.), 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. Pan-Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit (Ltu), Vs C &S Electric Ltd., Nbcc Plaza, Pushp (Formerly Known As M/S. Control & Vihar, Sector-Iii, Switchgear Co. Ltd.), New Delhi-110017. 22, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110020. Pan-Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ch more than the investment. The capital and reserve as on 31.03.2007 were Rs.1,17,79,62,711/- while the investments were only Rs.37,15,000/-. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of TAIKISHA Engineering India Ltd. 370 ITR 338(332) [Del.], no disallowance can be made. We, therefore, confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to restrict the disallowance of Rs.4,23,507/-. 15. Ground No.4 in assessee’s appeal as well as in revenue’s appeal related to the reducing and sustenance of the disallowance out of the foreign travel expenses. The facts relating to this ground are that…

M/S C&S Electric Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT Ltu, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue stands dismissed while appeal filed

Bench: Shri P.K.Bansal & Sh. Amit Shuklac & S Electric Ltd., Vs Dcit Ltu, (Formerly Known As Controls & Switchgear New Delhi. Co.Ltd.), 222, Okhla Industrial Estate, Phase-Iii, New Delhi. Pan-Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit (Ltu), Vs C &S Electric Ltd., Nbcc Plaza, Pushp (Formerly Known As M/S. Control & Vihar, Sector-Iii, Switchgear Co. Ltd.), New Delhi-110017. 22, Okhla Industrial Estate, New Delhi-110020. Pan-Aaacc0909K (Appellant) (Respondent)

…ch more than the investment. The capital and reserve as on 31.03.2007 were Rs.1,17,79,62,711/- while the investments were only Rs.37,15,000/-. Therefore, in view of the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court in the case of TAIKISHA Engineering India Ltd. 370 ITR 338(332) [Del.], no disallowance can be made. We, therefore, confirm the order of the Ld. CIT(A) to restrict the disallowance of Rs.4,23,507/-. 15. Ground No.4 in assessee’s appeal as well as in revenue’s appeal related to the reducing and sustenance of the disallowance out of the foreign travel expenses. The facts relating to this ground are that…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Datavision Systems (P) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result ground No. 1 of the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri I.C.Sudhir & Shri Prashant Maharishi & Acit, Vs. Datavision Systems P Ltd, Circle-10(1), 203, Pragati House, New Delhi 47-48, Nehru Place, New Delhi Pan:Aaacd3381N (Appellant) (Respondent)

…he present case unless the ld Assessing Officer records his satisfaction about the correctness of the claim of the assessee cannot move ahead for application of Rule 8D of the Act. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. Taikisha Engineering India ltd 370 ITR 338 (del) has held that it is only when voluntary disallowance made by the assessee u/s 14A of the Act is found to be unsatisfactory on examination of accounts, that Assessing Officer is entitled and authorized to compute deduction under Rule 8D of the IT Rules. As in the present case no such satisfaction is recorded respectfully following the decisi…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

…‘1962 disallowance is untenable. Reliance was placed on the following judgments: - Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT 81 taxmann.com 111 (SC) - Pr. CIT v. U.K. Paints 392 ITR 552 (Del) 6840/Del./2014 4 - CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. 370 ITR 338 (Del) - Joint Investments (P) Ltd. v. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Del) 4. On the other hand, ld. DR relied on the order of assessment 5. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The CIT(A) deleted the disallowance by holding as under: “6.5 I find that before applying the provisions of Rule 8D, the Ld. AO did not give credence…

H.T. Media Limited vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-IV

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…concerning the deletion of disallowance of interest under clause (ii) of Rule 8 D (2) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 to the Assessing Officer for a fresh determination in light of the decision of this Court in CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del)?” 3. While admitting ITA No. 549 of 2015 on 15th October 2015, the following question was framed for consideration: “Whether the Assessing Officer recorded a proper satisfaction in terms of Section 14A (2) and Rule 8 (D) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 and, in calculating the disallowance at 0.5% of average value of investments as pe…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-04 vs. M/S Il & Fs Energy Development Company Ltd

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

…ITA No. 520/2017 Page 1 of 11 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 2 + ITA No. 520/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-04 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel with Mr. Rajender Dangwal, Advocate versus IL & FS ENERGY DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LTD .... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH O R D E R % 16.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Micromax Informatics Ltd., Gurgaon

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri B. P. Jain

…out application of mind and without pointing out as to how he is not satisfied with the claim of the assessee has made the impugned addition, which is bad in law, as has been held in the following judgments :- i) CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 338 (Del.); ii) Kalyani Steels Ltd. v. ACIT [ITA No. 1733/PN/2012 dated 30.01.2014]; iii) Minda Capital Ltd. v. DCIT [ITA No. 1568/Del/2013 dated 25.03.2015]. 114.3 Without prejudice to above, the learned AR submitted that investment made by the assessee in ING Vysya Debt Fund and ING Vysya Life Insurance Policy does not enable the assessee to earn…

M/S. Micromax Informatics Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and that of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri I. C. Sudhir & Shri B. P. Jain

…out application of mind and without pointing out as to how he is not satisfied with the claim of the assessee has made the impugned addition, which is bad in law, as has been held in the following judgments :- i) CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. [2015] 370 ITR 338 (Del.); ii) Kalyani Steels Ltd. v. ACIT [ITA No. 1733/PN/2012 dated 30.01.2014]; iii) Minda Capital Ltd. v. DCIT [ITA No. 1568/Del/2013 dated 25.03.2015]. 114.3 Without prejudice to above, the learned AR submitted that investment made by the assessee in ING Vysya Debt Fund and ING Vysya Life Insurance Policy does not enable the assessee to earn…

M/S. Moonstar Securities Trading & Finance Co. Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

…ounts of the assessee should record his satisfaction about the correctness of the claim. In the present case we do not find any such satisfaction recorded by the ld Assessing Officer. Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. 370 ITR 338 has held as under:- “14. The view and the legal ratio expressed above is not being elucidated for the first time. The Delhi High Court in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT [2012] 347 ITR 272 (Delhi), has observed (page 290) : "Scope of sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 14A Sub-section (2) of section 14A of the said Act provides the manner in which…

M/S. Rites Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishirites Ltd, Dcit, Vs. Rites Bhawan, Circle-15(1), Plot No. 1, New Delhi Sector-29, Gurgaon Pan:Aaacr0830Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Vs. Rites Ltd, Circle-15(1), Rites Bhawan, New Delhi Plot No. 1, Sector-29, Gurgaon Pan:Aaacr0830Q (Appellant) (Respondent)

…expenditure with respect to the above income. He referred to the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Rites Limited V DCIT ITA No 2826/Del/2014 & DCIT V Rites Limited ITA No 3026/Del/2014 A Y 2009-10 case of CIT versus Taikisah Engineers India limited 370 ITR 338, Maxopp investment Ltd versus CIT 347 ITR 272 and CIT versus om Prakash Khaitan 138 DTR 197 (DEl). 12. Ld. departmental representative relied upon the orders of the lower authorities and submitted that when the assessee could not substantiate the explanation that no expenditure has been incurred by it for earning exempt income. The Ld. AO was rig…

Rajesh Kumar Saroj, Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result we direct the ld Assessing Officer to delete the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act of Rs

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishirajesh Kumar Saroj, Vs. Acit, Cottage No.1, Oberoi Apartments, 2 Circle-20(1), Sham Nath Marg, Delhi New Delhi Pan:Acios5597C (Appellant) (Respondent)

…o not find any such exercise carried out Page 3 of 3 by the ld Assessing Officer even to reject the claim of the assessee. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in CIT Vs. UK Paints India Ltd 244 Taxmann 209 following the decision of CIT Vs. Taikisha Engineering Ltd. 370 ITR 338 that Assessing Officer cannot recomputed disallowance u/s 14A by invoking Rule 8D without elucidating and explaining why assessee’s claim is unreasonable and unsatisfactory. In view of the above decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court we do not see any reason sustained disallowance u/s 14A of the Act. In the result we direct the ld Assessing Off…

DCIT (Ltu), New Delhi vs. M/S. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri B.P. Jainassessment Years 2010-11 Mahanagar Telephone Vs. Deputy Commissioner Nigam Ltd., Of Income Tax, Ltu, 5Th Floor, 9, Cgo Complex, New Delhi. Lodhi Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacm 0828R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Years 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Income Tax, Ltu, New Nigam Ltd., 5Th Floor, 9, Cgo Delhi. Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacm 0828R (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri H.K. Chaudury, Cit- D.R Assessee(S) By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv.

…im of the assessee. Here is a case where no logical reason has been given by the AO while invoking the provisions of section 14A. This issue is covered with the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del), wherein it was held as under: "Section 14A of the Act postulates and states that no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by an assessee in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act. Under sub Section (2) to Section 14A of the Act, the Assessing Officer is required to examine the…

M/S. Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri B.P. Jainassessment Years 2010-11 Mahanagar Telephone Vs. Deputy Commissioner Nigam Ltd., Of Income Tax, Ltu, 5Th Floor, 9, Cgo Complex, New Delhi. Lodhi Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacm 0828R (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Years 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Mahanagar Telephone Income Tax, Ltu, New Nigam Ltd., 5Th Floor, 9, Cgo Delhi. Complex, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. Pan: Aaacm 0828R (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri H.K. Chaudury, Cit- D.R Assessee(S) By : Shri Ved Jain, Adv.

…im of the assessee. Here is a case where no logical reason has been given by the AO while invoking the provisions of section 14A. This issue is covered with the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del), wherein it was held as under: "Section 14A of the Act postulates and states that no deduction shall be allowed in respect of expenditure incurred by an assessee in relation to income which does not form part of the total income under the Act. Under sub Section (2) to Section 14A of the Act, the Assessing Officer is required to examine the…

Srf Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result we also set aside the appeal of the assessee against chargeability of interest under section 234C of the income tax act back to the file of the Ld

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishisrf Limited, Vs. Dcit, Block-C, Sector-45, Gurgaon Circle-9(1), Pan: Aaacs0206P New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Dcit, Srf Limited, Vs. Circle-9(1), Block-C, Sector-45, Gurgaon New Delhi Pan: Aaacs0206P (Appellant) (Respondent) Srf Limited, Vs. Addl Cit, Block-C, Sector-45, Gurgaon Circle-9(1), Cr Building, Pan: Aaacs0206P New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent)

…laim of the assessee that it has not incurred any expenditure for earning exempt income then only can determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to such income for disallowance. The Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in CIT versus Taikisah engineering Ltd 370 ITR 338 has held that Under sub-section (2) of section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer is required to examine the accounts of the assessee and only when he is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of incurring no expenditure in relation to exempt income, can he determine the amount of expenditur…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S A.K. Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed whereas the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, Jm Ita No. 4987/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 4988/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 4989/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 A. K. Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Flat No. N, Sagar Apartment, 6, Tax, Central Circle-20, Tilak Marg, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabca1591L Ita No. 5616/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs A. K. Services Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Central Circle-20, Flat No. N, Sagar Apartment, 6, New Delhi Tilak Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabca1591L Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., Sh. Ashish Chadha & Sh. Ashish Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Ravi Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.03.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

…or the purposes of making the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act was not rebutted, therefore, no disallowance is called for as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (supra) wherein it has been held as under: “That the clear findings of the appellate authorities were that the assessee had sufficient funds for making investments in shares and mutual funds. The findings coupled with the failure of the Assessing Officer to record his satisfaction clinched the issue in favour of the assessee. The voluntary deduct…

M/S A.K. Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed whereas the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. Sudhanshu Srivastava, Jm Ita No. 4987/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2006-07 Ita No. 4988/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2007-08 Ita No. 4989/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 A. K. Services Pvt. Ltd., Vs Deputy Commissioner Of Income Flat No. N, Sagar Apartment, 6, Tax, Central Circle-20, Tilak Marg, New Delhi-110001 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabca1591L Ita No. 5616/Del/2013 : Asstt. Year : 2008-09 Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs A. K. Services Pvt. Ltd., Tax, Central Circle-20, Flat No. N, Sagar Apartment, 6, New Delhi Tilak Marg, New Delhi-110001 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabca1591L Assessee By : Sh. Ved Jain, Adv., Sh. Ashish Chadha & Sh. Ashish Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Ravi Jain, Cit Dr Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 20.03.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

…or the purposes of making the disallowance under Section 14A of the Act was not rebutted, therefore, no disallowance is called for as per the ratio laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (supra) wherein it has been held as under: “That the clear findings of the appellate authorities were that the assessee had sufficient funds for making investments in shares and mutual funds. The findings coupled with the failure of the Assessing Officer to record his satisfaction clinched the issue in favour of the assessee. The voluntary deduct…