CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd.

370 ITR 338High Court2015#339 most cited

What is CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. authority for?

The disallowance under Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, read with Rule 8D, cannot exceed the actual exempt income earned by the assessee in the relevant previous year. If no exempt income is earned, no disallowance under Section 14A can be made.

252

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. · Section 14A · Rule 8D · disallowance for exempt income · expenditure relating to exempt income · disallowance limit · exempt income not earned · disallowance cannot exceed exempt income · dividend income · Delhi High Court

Also reported as

229 Taxmann 14354 Taxmann.com 109

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 40(a)(ia)Section 8DSection 10ASection 10AASection 147
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(2)section 10(34)disallowance u/s 14adisallowance under section 14asection 14aprofits and gains of business or professionsection 115jsection 40(a)(ia)section 115jbsection 40(a)section 194section 37

Judgments citing CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd.

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 121/CTK/2023[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.120 To 123/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014 12 To 2014-15 Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Vs. Income Ta Income Tax Officer, Ward- Chandradeipur, Chandradeipur, Salepur, Salepur, 1(1), Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Adopb 5206 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Ranjan Dash Dash, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/0 /08/2023 O R D E R These Are These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Of The The Ld Ld Cit(A) Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi All Dated10.01.2023 10.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/104858788161) 23/104858788161) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 C/S/250/2022-23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011 23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011- 12 To 2014-15, Respectively. 15, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 143(3)Section 80C

…cash credits are unexplained and P a g e 6 | 12 ITA Nos.120 to 123/CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2014-15 represent the assessee's income. ln the absence of such material, the addition could not be made. CIT v. Taikisha Engineering lndia Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 666 (Delhi HC) ln this case, the Delhi High court held that the mere fact that the assessee could not provide a satisfactory explanation for the source of the investment could not lead to the presumption that it was the assessee's income. The court held that the AO must have some material to show that the investment represented the assessee's income…

Mr. Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Salepur vs. ITO, Ward-1(1), Cuttack

In the result, appeals of the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 120/CTK/2023[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Cuttack07 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Before Shri George Mathan, Judicialita Nos.120 To 123/Ctk/20 /Ctk/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 To 2014 12 To 2014-15 Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Mr Tapan Kumar Bhuyan, Vs. Income Ta Income Tax Officer, Ward- Chandradeipur, Chandradeipur, Salepur, Salepur, 1(1), Cuttack Cuttack Pan/Gir No. Pan/Gir No.Adopb 5206 C (Appellant (Appellant) .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Samir Ranjan Dash Dash, Ar Revenue By : Shri S.C.Mohanty : Shri S.C.Mohanty, Sr Dr Date Of Hearing : 07/08 8/2023 Date Of Pronouncement : 07/0 /08/2023 O R D E R These Are These Are Appeals Filed By The Assessee Against The Filed By The Assessee Against The Separate Orders Of Of The The Ld Ld Cit(A) Cit(A), Nfac, Delhi All Dated10.01.2023 10.01.2023 In Appeal No.Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048586596(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022- 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 23/1048587277(1),Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022-23/104858788161) 23/104858788161) & Itba/Nfac/S/250/2022 C/S/250/2022-23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011 23/1048588097(1) For The Assessment Years 2011- 12 To 2014-15, Respectively. 15, Respectively.

For Appellant: Shri Samir Ranjan DashFor Respondent: Shri S.C.Mohanty
Section 143(3)Section 80C

…cash credits are unexplained and P a g e 6 | 12 ITA Nos.120 to 123/CTK/2023 Assessment Years : 2011-12 to 2014-15 represent the assessee's income. ln the absence of such material, the addition could not be made. CIT v. Taikisha Engineering lndia Ltd. (2016) 381 ITR 666 (Delhi HC) ln this case, the Delhi High court held that the mere fact that the assessee could not provide a satisfactory explanation for the source of the investment could not lead to the presumption that it was the assessee's income. The court held that the AO must have some material to show that the investment represented the assessee's income…

M/S. Computer Science Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-Circle 2(1), Indore

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 319/IND/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…correctness of the assessee’s claim on the basis of objective analysis and cogent reasons. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of HT Media Limited vs. Pr. CIT, 399 ITR 596 and CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Limited, 370 ITR 338 as well as Joint Investments (P) Limited, 372 ITR 694. The Ld. AR further submitted that without prejudice to the above submissions, no disallowance was required to be made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D as the investment of Rs.18,65,61,000/- was held in subsidiary Fortune Infotech Limited and no new investment was made nor has any existing…

M/S. Computer Science Corporation India Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. The ACIT-Circle 2(1), Indore

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 292/IND/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…correctness of the assessee’s claim on the basis of objective analysis and cogent reasons. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of HT Media Limited vs. Pr. CIT, 399 ITR 596 and CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Limited, 370 ITR 338 as well as Joint Investments (P) Limited, 372 ITR 694. The Ld. AR further submitted that without prejudice to the above submissions, no disallowance was required to be made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D as the investment of Rs.18,65,61,000/- was held in subsidiary Fortune Infotech Limited and no new investment was made nor has any existing…

M/S. Computer Sciences Corporation India Private Limited, Indore vs. The Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax-2(1), Indore

In the result, all the three appeals are partly allowed for statistical purpose and the Stay Application is also disposed of

ITA 179/IND/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Indore10 Apr 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Bhagirath Mal Biyani

For Appellant: Shri Vishal Kalra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Mishra, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(8)

…correctness of the assessee’s claim on the basis of objective analysis and cogent reasons. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of HT Media Limited vs. Pr. CIT, 399 ITR 596 and CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Limited, 370 ITR 338 as well as Joint Investments (P) Limited, 372 ITR 694. The Ld. AR further submitted that without prejudice to the above submissions, no disallowance was required to be made under Section 14A read with Rule 8D as the investment of Rs.18,65,61,000/- was held in subsidiary Fortune Infotech Limited and no new investment was made nor has any existing…

Shri Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal, Korba, Korba(Cg) vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range Korba, Korba(Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assesee in ITA No

ITA 94/BIL/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 93 & 94/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal, Prop. Of M/S. Shrikishan & Co., T.P Nagar, Korba (C.G.) Pan : Acgpa4350B .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Y.K Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C Roy, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 40Section 68

…a Vs. Dy. CIT (2009) 180 Taxman 131 (Delhi) (iii) DIT (International Taxation) Vs. BNP Paribas SA (2013) Taxman 548 (Bom.) (iv) CIT Vs. L & T Infrastructure Development Projects Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 763 (Mad.) (v) CIT Vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del) (vi) CIT Vs. Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (2013) 37 Taxman 142(Guj.) 23. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as considered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by the ld.…

Shri Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal, Korba, Korba(Cg) vs. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range Korba, Korba(Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assesee in ITA No

ITA 93/BIL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur27 Mar 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 93 & 94/Rpr/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Shri Sushil Kumar Agrawal, Prop. Of M/S. Shrikishan & Co., T.P Nagar, Korba (C.G.) Pan : Acgpa4350B .......अपीलाथ"/Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Korba (C.G.) ……""यथ" / Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Y.K Mishra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Choudhary N.C Roy, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234BSection 40Section 68

…a Vs. Dy. CIT (2009) 180 Taxman 131 (Delhi) (iii) DIT (International Taxation) Vs. BNP Paribas SA (2013) Taxman 548 (Bom.) (iv) CIT Vs. L & T Infrastructure Development Projects Ltd. (2013) 357 ITR 763 (Mad.) (v) CIT Vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del) (vi) CIT Vs. Gujarat Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. (2013) 37 Taxman 142(Guj.) 23. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives for both the parties, perused the orders of the lower authorities and the material available on record, as well as considered the judicial pronouncements that have been pressed into service by the ld.…

M/S Tata Global Beverages Limited, Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

ITA 1899/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

…-vs.- Ashish Jhunjhunwala [G.A. No. 2990 of 2013] (Cal. HC) PCIT-vs.- Britannia Industries Limited [ITAT no. 45 of 2017 dated 19 July 2018] H.T. Media -vs.- PCIT (ITA no 548 & 549 of 2015 dtd 23-08-2017 (Del. HC) CIT-vs.- Taikisha Engineering India Ltd [2015] 370 ITR 338 (Del. HC) Integrated Coal Mining Ltd -vs.- DCIT [2016] 67 taxmann.com 260 (Koi) Damodar Valley Corporation -vs.- ACIT [2016] 157ITD 415 (Koi) RatanlalGaggar -vs.- DCIT (ITA no.1512 /Kol/2018 dt. 10 May 2019) Tata Industries Ltd. -vs.- DCIT [2020] 116 taxmann.com 875 (Mumbai -Trib.) Page 32 of 41 I.T.A. No.: 1854/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-1…

M/S Tata Global Beverages Limited, Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata

In the result, the appeals filed by the assessee for AY 2012-

ITA 1854/KOL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2023AY 2012-13

Bench: Dr. Manish Borad & Sonjoy Sarma

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92B

…-vs.- Ashish Jhunjhunwala [G.A. No. 2990 of 2013] (Cal. HC) PCIT-vs.- Britannia Industries Limited [ITAT no. 45 of 2017 dated 19 July 2018] H.T. Media -vs.- PCIT (ITA no 548 & 549 of 2015 dtd 23-08-2017 (Del. HC) CIT-vs.- Taikisha Engineering India Ltd [2015] 370 ITR 338 (Del. HC) Integrated Coal Mining Ltd -vs.- DCIT [2016] 67 taxmann.com 260 (Koi) Damodar Valley Corporation -vs.- ACIT [2016] 157ITD 415 (Koi) RatanlalGaggar -vs.- DCIT (ITA no.1512 /Kol/2018 dt. 10 May 2019) Tata Industries Ltd. -vs.- DCIT [2020] 116 taxmann.com 875 (Mumbai -Trib.) Page 32 of 41 I.T.A. No.: 1854/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-1…

DCIT, C-11(1), New Delhi vs. Hero Motocorp Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1982/DEL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Narendra Kumar Billaiya & Shri Kul Bharat

Section 14ASection 2(22)(e)Section 40Section 40a

…aints (India) (P.) Ltd.: 392 ITR 552 (Del.) - CIT v. Abhishek Industries Ltd.: 380 ITR 652 (P&H) - CIT vs. I.P. Support Services India (P) Ltd: 378 ITR 240 (Del) - Joint Investments (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 372 ITR 694 (Del) (Del) - CIT v. Taikisha Engg. India Ltd.: 370 ITR 338 (Del.) Even otherwise, there is no nexus of expenses, like interest expenditure and other administrative expenses with investments, warranting disallowance under section 14A. Interest Expenditure [Disallowance under Rule 8D(ii)l The assessee is a cash rich company, which does not borrow funds for making investment. The marginal interest expendit…

Shriram Capital Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Cir-6(1), Chennai

The appeal stand allowed in terms of our above order

ITA 2080/CHNY/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Dec 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri Mahavir Singh & Hon’Ble Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Am

For Appellant: Shri Raghav Rajeev Menon (Advocate)-Ld. ARFor Respondent: Shri Darzakhum Songate (CIT) –Ld. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…. Therefore this ground of appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Accordingly, this ground of appeal stands allowed in favour of the assessee’’. Similar view was taken up by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd, 370 ITR 338 and PCIT vs. Moonstar Securities Trading and Finance Co. (P) Ltd, 105 taxmann.com 274. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court had firmly held that mere rejection of the explanation of the assessee per se cannot be accepted. This decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Moonstar Securities Trading and Finance Co. (P) Ltd, was affirmed by the Hon'ble Supr…

M/S. Svl Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle-6(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2113/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai21 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singhand Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.2113/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 Svl Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner Of Shriram House, 1St Floor, Income Tax, No.4, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Vs. Corporate Circle-6(1), Chennai – 600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aaacs-7696-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent By : Shri Chinthapalli Meher Chand, Jcit सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 21.09.2022 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 21.10.2022

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chinthapalli Meher Chand
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘बी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर "सह, उपा"य" एवं "ी जी. मंजुनाथ, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENTAND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.2113/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2012-13 SVL Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner of Shriram House, 1st Floor, Income Tax, No.4, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Vs. Corporate Circle-6(1), Chennai – 600 017. Chennai. [PAN: AAACS-7696-D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""यथ" क" ओर से /Respondent by :…

Hsbc Software Development (India) Private Limited, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 11, Pune

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 2403/PUN/2017[2012-13]Status: HeardITAT Pune28 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 10ASection 10BSection 10B(7)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

…owance and enhanced it does not mean that Rule 8D becomes applicable and the disallowance should be computed as per the prescribed formula.” 12. The similar view was taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd., 370 ITR 338 (Del) and PCIT vs. Moonstar Securities Trading and Finance Co. (P) Ltd, 105 taxmann.com 274. In the present case, the AO vide para 7.6 merely observed that the assessee company made substantial investments in mutual funds and therefore, incurred substantial expenditure to earn the exempt income and in the circumstances, he was of the opinion that…

Hsbc Software Development (India) Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 11, Pune

In the result, the appeal in ITA No

ITA 2402/PUN/2017[2011-12]Status: HeardITAT Pune28 Sept 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhurysl.

For Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar
Section 10ASection 10BSection 10B(7)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92C

…owance and enhanced it does not mean that Rule 8D becomes applicable and the disallowance should be computed as per the prescribed formula.” 12. The similar view was taken by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd., 370 ITR 338 (Del) and PCIT vs. Moonstar Securities Trading and Finance Co. (P) Ltd, 105 taxmann.com 274. In the present case, the AO vide para 7.6 merely observed that the assessee company made substantial investments in mutual funds and therefore, incurred substantial expenditure to earn the exempt income and in the circumstances, he was of the opinion that…

Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax Circle -5, Pune vs. Serum Institute of India Pvt Ltd., Pune

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

ITA 323/PUN/2021[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune15 Sept 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Percy PardiwallaFor Respondent: Shri J. P. Chadraker
Section 10ASection 14ASection 35Section 35(1)

…enditure of Rs.1,35,00,000/- was incurred to earn exempt income is incorrect, cannot resort to the provisions of section 14A of the Act. He placed reliance on the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd., 370 ITR 338 (Del) and PCIT vs. Moonstar Securities Trading and Finance Co. (P) Ltd, 105 taxmann.com 274. 14. We heard the rival submissions and perused the material on record. The issue in the present ground of appeal no.2 relates to the applicability of provisions of section 14A of the Act to the facts of the present case. Admittedly, the respondent-assesse…

Haldia Coke and Chemicals Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. Addl. CIT, Range- 11, New Delhi

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

ITA 470/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Aug 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Ms. Astha Chandra[Assessment Year: 2012-13]

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144(13)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH, ‘I-1’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND Ms. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER [Assessment Year: 2012-13] Haldia Coke And Chemicals Additional Commissioner of Private Limited, Income-tax, 6th Floor, Mookambika Vs Range-11, Complex, Lady Desika Road, New Delhi Mylapore, Chennai-600004 PAN-AABCH5389P Assessee Revenue Assessee by None Revenue by Sh. Mahesh Shah, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing 25.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement 26.08.2022 ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA, AM, This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Assessing Officer, d…

Kumar Properties and Real Estate Pvt.Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 14, Pune

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

ITA 684/PUN/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune25 Aug 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.684/Pun/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kumar Properties & Real Vs. Dcit, Circle-14, Pune. Estate Pvt. Ltd., 1St Floor, Kumar Capital, East Street, Camp, Pune-411001. Pan : Aaack7490H Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Rajan R. Vora & Shri Rajendra Agiwal Revenue By : Shri Abhinay S. Kumbhar Date Of Hearing : 19.07.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 7, Pune [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 23.02.2018 For The Assessment Year 2014-15. 2. Briefly, The Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Promoter & Developer Of The Housing Project. The Return Of Income For The Assessment Year

For Appellant: Shri Rajan R. Vora &For Respondent: Shri Abhinay S. Kumbhar
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 22

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.684/PUN/2018 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2014-15 Kumar Properties and Real Vs. DCIT, Circle-14, Pune. Estate Pvt. Ltd., 1st Floor, Kumar Capital, East Street, Camp, Pune-411001. PAN : AAACK7490H Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Rajan R. Vora & Shri Rajendra Agiwal Revenue by : Shri Abhinay S. Kumbhar Date of hearing : 19.07.2022 Date of pronouncement : 25.08.2022 आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This is an appeal filed by t…

Sriram Credit Company Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT CC 6(1), Chennai

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

ITA 956/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.956/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Shriram Credit Co. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner- Shriram House, Of Income Tax, 1St Floor, No.4, Corporate Circle-6(1), Burkit Road, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai. [Pan: Aagcs 4497 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.R.Sivaraman, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, , माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.956/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. M/s.Shriram Credit Co. Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner- Shriram House, of Income Tax, 1st Floor, No.4, Corporate Circle-6(1), Burkit Road, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai. [PAN: AAGCS 4497 N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.R.Sivaraman…

Svl Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT CC 6(2), Chennai

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

ITA 955/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.955/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Svl Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner- Shriram House, Of Income Tax, 1St Floor, No.4, Corporate Circle-6(2), Burkit Road, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai. [Pan: Aaacs 7696 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.R.Sivaraman, AdvFor Respondent: Mr.P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, , माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.955/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. M/s.SVL Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner- Shriram House, of Income Tax, 1st Floor, No.4, Corporate Circle-6(2), Burkit Road, Chennai. T. Nagar, Chennai. [PAN: AAACS 7696 D] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Mr.R.Sivaraman, Adv. ""यथ" क"…

Shriram Financial Ventures (Chennai) Pvt. Limited, Chennai vs. Dcitcc3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 942/CHNY/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Jul 2022AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Hon’Ble & Shri G. Manjunatha, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.941/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 V. M/S.Shriram Capital Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner- Shriram House, Of Income Tax, 1St Floor, No.4, Burkit Road, Corporate Circle-6(1), T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai. [Pan: Aabcs 2726 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Respondent: Dr.S.Palani Kumar, CIT /
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ’डी’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी महावीर िसंह, माननीय उपा"", एवं "ी जी. मंजूनाथा, , माननीय लेखा सद" के सम" BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.941/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2017-18 v. M/s.Shriram Capital Ltd., The Asst. Commissioner- Shriram House, of Income Tax, 1st Floor, No.4, Burkit Road, Corporate Circle-6(1), T.Nagar, Chennai-600 017. Chennai. [PAN: AABCS 2726 B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.942/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण व…