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.

Shriram Capital Limited, Chennai vs. ACIT, CC3(1), Chennai

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

ITA 941/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…

The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-1(1), Rajkot-Gujarat vs. M/S Atul Auto Limited, Shapar.Veraval

The appeal is allowed

ITA 251/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI T. R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.214/Rjt/2016 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Atul Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Plot No. 1 to 4, Survey No. Circle-1(1), 86, Nr. Microwave Towers, Rajkot NH 8B, Shapar Veraval, Tal: Kotda Sangani, Rajkot-360002 [PAN No.AACCA3018M] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.251/Rjt/2016 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) DCIT Vs. Atul Auto Ltd. Circle-1(1), Plot No. 1 to 4, Rajkot Survey No. 86, Nr. Microwave Towers, NH 8B, Shapar Veraval, Tal: Kotda Sangani,…

Atul Auto Limited, Rajkot-Gujarat vs. The Dy. Commr. of Income Tax, Cir.-1(1), Rajkot-Gujarat

The appeal is allowed

ITA 214/RJT/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Rajkot23 May 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Waseem Ahmed & Shri T. R. Senthil Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Kapil Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Rathi, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 80ISection 80J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL RAJKOT BENCH, RAJKOT (THROUGH VIRTUAL COURT) BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI T. R. SENTHIL KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.214/Rjt/2016 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) Atul Auto Ltd. Vs. DCIT Plot No. 1 to 4, Survey No. Circle-1(1), 86, Nr. Microwave Towers, Rajkot NH 8B, Shapar Veraval, Tal: Kotda Sangani, Rajkot-360002 [PAN No.AACCA3018M] (Appellant) .. (Respondent) I.T.A. No.251/Rjt/2016 (Assessment Year: 2012-13) DCIT Vs. Atul Auto Ltd. Circle-1(1), Plot No. 1 to 4, Rajkot Survey No. 86, Nr. Microwave Towers, NH 8B, Shapar Veraval, Tal: Kotda Sangani,…

Shriram Credit Company Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai

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

ITA 1307/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1199/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Credit Company Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1) I/C, Limited, Shriram House, No. 4, Aayakar Bhavan, Wanaparthy Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Block, 7Th Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 042. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aagcs4497N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1307/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Credit Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Mookambika Complex, Income Tax, No. 4, Lady Desika Road, Corporate Circle 6(1), Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri R.Sivaraman, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 26.12.2017 Relevant To The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri R.Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
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 7 I.T.A. Nos.1199 & 1307Chny/18 accepted. This decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Moonstar Securities Trading and Finance Co. (P) Ltd,…

DCIT Corporate Circle 6(1) (I/C), Chennai vs. Shriram Credit Company Limited, Chennai

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

ITA 1199/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 Apr 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1199/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Credit Company Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1) I/C, Limited, Shriram House, No. 4, Aayakar Bhavan, Wanaparthy Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Block, 7Th Floor, 121, M.G. Road, Chennai 600 042. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aagcs4497N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.1307/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Credit Company Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Limited, Mookambika Complex, Income Tax, No. 4, Lady Desika Road, Corporate Circle 6(1), Mylapore, Chennai 600 004. Chennai 600 034. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Department By : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit Assessee By : Shri R.Sivaraman, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 30.03.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 13.04.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Revenue As Well As Assessee Are Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 26.12.2017 Relevant To The Assessment

For Appellant: Shri R.Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri P. Sajit Kumar, JCIT
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 7 I.T.A. Nos.1199 & 1307Chny/18 accepted. This decision of Delhi High Court in the case of Moonstar Securities Trading and Finance Co. (P) Ltd,…

Shriram Credit Company Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai

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

ITA 3254/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3254/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Shriram Credit Company Ltd., Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of No. 4, Mookambika Complex, Income Tax, Lady Desika Road, Mylapore, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 004. Chennai. [Pan:Aagcs4497N] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri G. Johnson, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 08.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.03.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: This Appeal Filed By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 28.08.2018 Relevant To The Assessment Year 2012-13. The Assessee Has Raised Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1) The Order Of The Cit{A) In I.T.A.No.16 1201-1-181 Cit(A)-15 Dated 28.08.2018 Is Against Law & Facts Of The Case. 2) The Cit(A) Erred In Confirming Part Of The Disallowance Made U/S14A R.W. Rule 8D 3) The Cit(A) Erred In Not Appreciating The Fact That The Entire Dividend Income Received From Mutual Fund Of Rs.29,98,544 Was Credited To 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri G. Johnson, Addl. CIT
Section 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…

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3255/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3168 & 3255/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcs2726B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3216 & 3217/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1), Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 29.08.2018 Relevant To The 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate
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…

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3217/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3168 & 3255/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcs2726B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3216 & 3217/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1), Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 29.08.2018 Relevant To The 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate
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…

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3216/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3168 & 3255/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcs2726B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3216 & 3217/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1), Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 29.08.2018 Relevant To The 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate
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…

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

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3168/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3168 & 3255/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcs2726B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3216 & 3217/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1), Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 29.08.2018 Relevant To The 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate
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…

Dcm Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-3, New Delhi

ITA 603/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri V.P. Gupta, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Yagyasaini Kakkar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…T [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC) • Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT & Anr. (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) • HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (2017) 399 ITR 576(Del); • CIT v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (2018) 407 ITR 159 (Del); • CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del); CIT Vs. Bharti Televenture Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 502 (Del.) • The Nashik Road Deolali Vyapari Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. ACIT, ITA No. 312/2016 decided on 16.09.2021 - ITAT Pune • DCIT v. Nirshilp Securities Pvt. Ltd, ITA No. 6321/2019 decided on 21.06.2021 - ITAT Mumbai. • GAIL (India) Ltd. v. ACIT, ITA No. 301/2006 decided on 27.11.2020-ITAT De…

Addl.CIT, Special Range-3, New Delhi vs. Dcm Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 183/DEL/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi31 Dec 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri Ravish Sood

For Appellant: Shri V.P. Gupta, Advocate a/wFor Respondent: Ms. Yagyasaini Kakkar, CIT-DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 271(1)(c)Section 36(1)(iii)

…T [2018] 402 ITR 640 (SC) • Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. Dy.CIT & Anr. (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC) • HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT (2017) 399 ITR 576(Del); • CIT v. Maruti Udyog Ltd. (2018) 407 ITR 159 (Del); • CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (2015) 370 ITR 338 (Del); CIT Vs. Bharti Televenture Ltd. (2011) 331 ITR 502 (Del.) • The Nashik Road Deolali Vyapari Sahakari Bank Ltd. v. ACIT, ITA No. 312/2016 decided on 16.09.2021 - ITAT Pune • DCIT v. Nirshilp Securities Pvt. Ltd, ITA No. 6321/2019 decided on 21.06.2021 - ITAT Mumbai. • GAIL (India) Ltd. v. ACIT, ITA No. 301/2006 decided on 27.11.2020-ITAT De…

Addl. CIT, Special Range-7, New Delhi vs. Rites Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 7319/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Dec 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh, Member Assessment Year: 2015-16 Addl. Cit, Vs. Rites Ltd., Special Range-7, Scope Building, New Delhi. Scope Minar, Laxmi Nagar, New Delhi. Pan : Aaacr0830Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R.S. Singhvi, Advocate Revenue By : Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.10.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 14.12.2021 Order Per R.K. Panda, Am: This Appeal Filed By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Dated 23Rd August, 2018 Of The Cit(A)-38, New Delhi, Relating To Assessment Year 2015- 16. 2. Ground Of Appeal No.1 By The Revenue Reads As Under:- “1. On The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Has Erred In Law In Deleting Disallowance Of Rs. 1,17,21,750/- U/S 14A Read With Rule 8D Ignoring The Mandatory Provision Of Rule 8D.”

For Appellant: Shri R.S. Singhvi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmed, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 14Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…t permissible. Ld. CIT (A) decided this issue in favour of the assessee by relying upon the decisions rendered by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in cases of Pradeep Khanna vs. ACIT in ITA 953/2015 order dated 11.08.2016, CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering Private Limited 370 ITR 338 (Del.) and Maxopp Investment (P) Ltd. s. CIT 347 ITR 272 (Del.). 12. Identical issue has been decided in favour of the assessee by the coordinate Bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case in ITA No.2826/Del/2014 & ITA No.3026/Del/2014 order dated 24.04.2017. In the appeal at hand, it is admitted fact that substantial portion of the investments…

Hero Moto Corp Ltd., New Delhi vs. Neac, Delhi

ITA 706/DEL/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Nov 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surendra Pal
Section 143(3)Section 144BSection 144CSection 144C(13)Section 145Section 1lSection 80ISection 92C

…nts (India) (P.) Ltd.: 392 ITR 552 (Del.) ix. CIT v. Abhishek Industries Ltd.: 380 ITR 652 (P&H) x. CIT vs. I.P. Support Services India (P) Ltd: 378 ITR 240 (Del) xi. Joint Investments (P.) Ltd. v. CIT: 372 ITR 694 (Del) xii. CIT v. Taikisha Engg. India Ltd.: 370 ITR 338 (Del.) 42. It was further submitted that even otherwise, there is no nexus of expenses, like interest expenditure and other administrative expenses with investments, warranting disallowance under section 14A. 43. With respect to the interest expenditure, it was submitted that the appellant is a cash rich company, which does not borrow funds for…

M/S. Interarch Building Products Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 969/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 94

…er assessment which are tabulated as under :- As on As on 31.03.2006 31.03.2007 Rs.lakhs Rs.lakhs (i) Capital & Reserves 5,257.45 7,056.94 (ii) Investments 1,108.19 1,375.75 17. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Taikisha Engg. India Ltd. – (2015) 370 ITR 338 held that, “when the assessee has sufficient funds for making investment in shares and mutual funds to earn the dividend income, no disallowance on account of interest is sustainable.” In the instant case as against the investment of Rs.1,108.19 lakhs & Rs.1,375.75 lakhs as on 31.03.2006 & 31.03.2007 respectively, assessee had capital & reserve…

M/S. Interarch Building Products Pvt. Ltd., Noida vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 2120/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 94

…er assessment which are tabulated as under :- As on As on 31.03.2006 31.03.2007 Rs.lakhs Rs.lakhs (i) Capital & Reserves 5,257.45 7,056.94 (ii) Investments 1,108.19 1,375.75 17. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Taikisha Engg. India Ltd. – (2015) 370 ITR 338 held that, “when the assessee has sufficient funds for making investment in shares and mutual funds to earn the dividend income, no disallowance on account of interest is sustainable.” In the instant case as against the investment of Rs.1,108.19 lakhs & Rs.1,375.75 lakhs as on 31.03.2006 & 31.03.2007 respectively, assessee had capital & reserve…

M/S Interarch Building Products Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ITA 2353/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri O.P. Kant & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri M.P. Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Ms. Sunita Singh, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 94

…er assessment which are tabulated as under :- As on As on 31.03.2006 31.03.2007 Rs.lakhs Rs.lakhs (i) Capital & Reserves 5,257.45 7,056.94 (ii) Investments 1,108.19 1,375.75 17. Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT vs. Taikisha Engg. India Ltd. – (2015) 370 ITR 338 held that, “when the assessee has sufficient funds for making investment in shares and mutual funds to earn the dividend income, no disallowance on account of interest is sustainable.” In the instant case as against the investment of Rs.1,108.19 lakhs & Rs.1,375.75 lakhs as on 31.03.2006 & 31.03.2007 respectively, assessee had capital & reserve…

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Moser Baer Solar Ltd., New Delhi

Appeal are partly allowed

ITA 3577/DEL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Oct 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Pundir, Senior DR
Section 10(34)Section 14A

…case. 6. We have perused the order passed by the ld. CIT (A) who has decided the issue by following the decision rendered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Joint Investments (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT 372 ITR 694 and CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. – 370 ITR 338 (Del.) by returning following findings :- “4.3 I have carefully perused the assessment order and the submissions of the appellant on this issue. It is the fact that during the year in appeal appellant has earned dividend income of Rs.2,33,95,428/-, which it has claimed exempt u/s 10(34) of the I.T Act, 1961. In its submission dated 17.02.2017 ap…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 9, New Delhi vs. Tv Today Network Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 5204/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Senior DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

…e than the exempt income as has been held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Joint Investment Private Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.). 10. While deciding the identical issue, Hon’ble Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Taikisha Engg. India Ltd. – (2015) 370 ITR 338 has held as under :- “Thus, s. 14A(2) of the Act and r. 8D(1) in unison and affirmatively record that the computation or disallowance made by the assessee or claim that no expenditure was incurred to earn exempt income must be examined with reference to the accounts, and only and when the explanation/claim of the assessee is not satisfactory, c…

Bio Med Pvt. Ltd., Ghaziabad vs. DCIT, Circle- 1, Ghaziabad

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 2771/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K.N. Chary

For Appellant: Shri Akhilesh Kumar, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Jagdish Singh Dahia, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘A’ BENCH, NEW DELHI [THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE] BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, AND SHRI K.N. CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 2770/DEL/2018 [A.Y 2011-12] & ITA No. 2771/DEL/2018 [A.Y 2012-13] BIO MED PVT LTD Vs. The Addl. C.I.T C – 96, Site – 1, B.S. Road Range - 2 Industrial Area, Ghaziabad Ghaziabad PAN: AABCB 3477 C [Appellant] [Respondent] Assessee by : Shri Akhilesh Kumar, Adv Revenue by : Shri Jagdish Singh Dahia, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 26.07.2021 Date of Pronouncement : 26.07.2021 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER, Both…