CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (Delhi, High Court)

275 CTR 316High Court2015#17482 most cited
5

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 348,631 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2021.

Judgments citing CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (Delhi, High Court)

ACIT, Gurgaon vs. M/S Dlf Universal Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed and appeal of the ld AO is partly allowed

ITA 3432/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Dlf Universal Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 3Rd Floor, Shopping Mall, Arjun Circle-1(1), Marg, Dlf City, Phase-1, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Aaacj1655P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Dlf Universal Ltd, Circle-1(1), 3Rd Floor, Shopping Mall, Gurgaon Arjun Marg, Dlf City, Phase-1, Gurgaon Pan: Aaacj1655P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Aman Preet, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40ASection 40A(2)(b)

…has deleted the same on this basis only. The judicial precedents also now support this claim of the assessee. Hon. Delhi High court in CIT V Taikisha Eng Co Ltd [2015] 54 taxmann.com 109 (Delhi)/[2015] 229 Taxman 143 (Delhi)/[2015] 370 ITR 338 (Delhi)/[2015] 275 CTR 316 (Delhi) has held that :- 18. It is in this context we feel that the findings recorded by the CIT(A) and the Tribunal are appropriate and relevant. The clear findings are that the assessee had sufficient funds for making investments in shares and mutual funds. The said findings coupled with the failure of the Assessing Officer to hold and record h…

M/S Dlf Universal Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, Gurgaon

In the result appeal of the assessee is dismissed and appeal of the ld AO is partly allowed

ITA 3391/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 May 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Dlf Universal Ltd, Vs. Dcit, 3Rd Floor, Shopping Mall, Arjun Circle-1(1), Marg, Dlf City, Phase-1, Gurgaon Gurgaon Pan: Aaacj1655P (Appellant) (Respondent) Acit, Vs. Dlf Universal Ltd, Circle-1(1), 3Rd Floor, Shopping Mall, Gurgaon Arjun Marg, Dlf City, Phase-1, Gurgaon Pan: Aaacj1655P (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Aman Preet, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40ASection 40A(2)(b)

…has deleted the same on this basis only. The judicial precedents also now support this claim of the assessee. Hon. Delhi High court in CIT V Taikisha Eng Co Ltd [2015] 54 taxmann.com 109 (Delhi)/[2015] 229 Taxman 143 (Delhi)/[2015] 370 ITR 338 (Delhi)/[2015] 275 CTR 316 (Delhi) has held that :- 18. It is in this context we feel that the findings recorded by the CIT(A) and the Tribunal are appropriate and relevant. The clear findings are that the assessee had sufficient funds for making investments in shares and mutual funds. The said findings coupled with the failure of the Assessing Officer to hold and record h…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Kanpur vs. Commercial Engineers & Body Builders Co. Ltd., Kanpur

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 658/LKW/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Jul 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Maduk, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri B. L. Gupta, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…s exempt income and informed the A.O. that it has not incurred any expenditure in earning the income which is claimed as exempt income and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (Delhi, High Court) dated 25.11.2014, 275 CTR 316 (Del) 2015 wherein it was held that “The A.O. at the first instance must examine the disallowance made by the assessee or the claim of the assessee that no expenditure was incurred to earn the exempted income. If and only if the AO is not satisfied on this count after making reference to the accounts, that he is entitled to adopt the method as pr…

Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-6, Kanpur vs. Commercial Engineers & Body Builders Co. Ltd., Kanpur

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 657/LKW/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow19 Jul 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri. A. D. Jain & Shri T. S. Kapoor

For Appellant: Shri S. K. Maduk, CIT (DR)For Respondent: Shri B. L. Gupta, FCA
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 32(1)(iia)

…s exempt income and informed the A.O. that it has not incurred any expenditure in earning the income which is claimed as exempt income and the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (Delhi, High Court) dated 25.11.2014, 275 CTR 316 (Del) 2015 wherein it was held that “The A.O. at the first instance must examine the disallowance made by the assessee or the claim of the assessee that no expenditure was incurred to earn the exempted income. If and only if the AO is not satisfied on this count after making reference to the accounts, that he is entitled to adopt the method as pr…

Shapoorji Pallanji and Company P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 3(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3053/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Mar 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. Dcit, Ltd. Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Shapporji Pallonji Centre, Room No.609, 6Th Floor, Vs. 41/44 Minoo Desai Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Colaba Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No. Aaacs6994C

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,‘जी’,मुंबई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES, ‘G’ MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2011-12 M/s Shapoorji Pallonji & Co. DCIT, Ltd. Circle-3(3), बनाम/ Shapporji Pallonji Centre, Room No.609, 6th floor, Vs. 41/44 Minoo Desai Marg, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K.Road, Colaba Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400005 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) PAN. No. AAACS6994C "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by Shri Chetan Karia Mrs. Vidi…

CIT v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. (Delhi, High Court) (275 CTR 316) — Cited in 5 Judgments | BharatTax