CIT v. U. P. Electronics Corpn. Ltd.

397 ITR 113High Court2017#9254 most cited
12

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2017 to 2025.

Issues it is cited on

disallowance u/s 14arule 46asection 14ascrutiny assessmentprevious yearsection 142(1)transfercompanysection 14section 143(3)indiatotal income

Judgments citing CIT v. U. P. Electronics Corpn. Ltd.

M/S. APCO INFRATECH PVT. LTD.,,LUCKNOW vs. ACIT-I, LUCKNOW

In the result, appeals vide I

ITA 357/LKW/2020[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Lucknow02 Apr 2025AY 2017-18
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 80I

….\nFurther, Apex Court has also affirmed the decision of Pr. Commissioner\nof Income Tax, Patiala vs. State Bank of Patiala [2017] 391 ITR 218\n(P&H) and held that disallowances u/s 14A cannot exceed exempt income.\n\nCIT vs U.P. Electronics Corpn. Ltd [2017] 397 ITR 113 (Allahabad) – It\nwas held that for making disallowance under section 144, rule 8D(1)(b)\nwill come into picture only when Assessing Officer recorded his non-\nsatisfaction with regard to claim of assessee that no expenditure has been\nincurred or with regard to correctness of claim of expenditure by assessee.\n\nPCIT vsKeshav Power Ltd [2020] 26…

AARTI SPONGE AND POWER LTD.,RAIPUR vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, -1(1), RAIPUR, RAIPUR

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

ITA 70/RPR/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur20 Sept 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.70/Rpr/2023 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year: 2013-14 V. Aarti Sponge & Power Ltd. Acit -1 (1) Aarti House, Ashoka Ratna Shankar Raipur Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh – 492 001

For Respondent: Sr. D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…, the burden was on the AO to prove otherwise as held in the following cases: -  Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. vs Addl. CIT (2014) 151 ITD 566 (Mum.).  Pradeep Khanna vs ACIT order dt. 11.8.2016 of Delhi HC  CIT vs U. P. Electronics Corporation Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 113 (All) 1.7 In view of the above explanation, it is requested that the disallowance made by AO may kindly be deleted.” 9. With aforesaid submissions, it was the prayer of Learned AR that since assessee has no exempt income earned on impugned investments. Sufficient interest free funds were available with assessee. Interest bearing funds had nexus…

INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BHILAI vs. MESERS METEX ENGINEERS, BHILAI

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 247/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 68

…ded any satisfaction/finding in support of the disallowance made. On this contention ld. AR placed his reliance on following judgements: 1. Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2204) 151 ITD 566 (Mum.) 2. CIT vs U.P. Electronics Corporation Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 113 (All.) 3. Pradeep Khanna vs. ACIT order dated 11.08.2016 of Delhi HC. 11.6 We have considered the rival submissions and contentions, perused the material available on records and have perused the case laws placed before us. In view of the various judgments quoted by the Ld AR, it is the settled law now that No disallowance u/s 14A can be made if…

MESERS METEX ENGINEERS,BHILAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1(2), BHILAI

In the result Ground No 8 of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 238/RPR/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur14 Jun 2023AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.238/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) M/S Metex Engineers, Vs Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G & आयकर अपील सं./Ita No.247/Rpr/2019 (Assessment Year: 2015-2016) Ito, Ward-1(2), Bhilai Vs M/S Metex Engineers, Shop No.10-11, Ganesh Complex, Shakti Vihar, Risali Bhilai, Durg Pan No. :Aawfm 8852 G (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) .. "नधा"रती क" ओर से /Assessee By : Shri R.B.Doshi, Ca राज"व क" ओर से /Revenue By : Shri V.K.Singh, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing : 24/04/2023 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement : 14/06/2023 आदेश / O R D E R Per Arun Khodpia, Am :

For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri V.K.Singh, CIT-DR
Section 68

…ded any satisfaction/finding in support of the disallowance made. On this contention ld. AR placed his reliance on following judgements: 1. Godrej Consumer Products Ltd. v. Addl. CIT (2204) 151 ITD 566 (Mum.) 2. CIT vs U.P. Electronics Corporation Ltd. (2017) 397 ITR 113 (All.) 3. Pradeep Khanna vs. ACIT order dated 11.08.2016 of Delhi HC. 11.6 We have considered the rival submissions and contentions, perused the material available on records and have perused the case laws placed before us. In view of the various judgments quoted by the Ld AR, it is the settled law now that No disallowance u/s 14A can be made if…

SHREE BALAJI ENGICONS PVT. LTD,JHARSUGUDA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 195/CTK/2019[204-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…ome Tax(Appeals) is in accordance with the law. " [Emphasis Supplied} 110 ITA Nos.193-195/CTK/2019 • The appellant also places reliance on the following judicial precedents in support of its contention: CIT v. U. P. Electronics Corpn. Ltd. reported in [2017} 397 ITR 113 (Allahabad) Eicher Motors Ltd. v. CIT-III reported in [2017} 39B ITR 51 (Delhi) HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT-IV, New Delhi reported in [2017} 399 ITR 576 (Delhi) Pr. CIT Vadodara-I v. Gujarat State Fertilizers And Chemicals Ltd. reported in [2019} 416 ITR 13 (Gujarat) Pr. CIT v. CIMS Hospital (P.) Ltd. reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com 227 (Gujarat)…

M/S- SBEP-GRIL(JOINT VENTURE),JHARSUGUDA vs. PRINCIPAL CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 194/CTK/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…ome Tax(Appeals) is in accordance with the law. " [Emphasis Supplied} 110 ITA Nos.193-195/CTK/2019 • The appellant also places reliance on the following judicial precedents in support of its contention: CIT v. U. P. Electronics Corpn. Ltd. reported in [2017} 397 ITR 113 (Allahabad) Eicher Motors Ltd. v. CIT-III reported in [2017} 39B ITR 51 (Delhi) HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT-IV, New Delhi reported in [2017} 399 ITR 576 (Delhi) Pr. CIT Vadodara-I v. Gujarat State Fertilizers And Chemicals Ltd. reported in [2019} 416 ITR 13 (Gujarat) Pr. CIT v. CIMS Hospital (P.) Ltd. reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com 227 (Gujarat)…

M/S- RAWAT BALAJI (JOINT VENTURE),JHARSUGUDA vs. PRILNCIPAL, CIT, SAMBALPUR

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 193/CTK/2019[204-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack15 Dec 2021

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg, Jm & Shri Manish Borad, Am आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.193/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Rawats-Balaji(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aabar 9061 J Tan No. : Bbnr01647 C & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.194/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) M/S Sbepl-Gril(Jv), Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aafas 2639 R Tan No. : Bbns04348 B & आयकर अपीऱ सं./Ita Nos.195/Ctk/2019 (नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2014-2015) Shree Balaji Engicons Pvt Ltd Vs Pr.Cit, Sambalpur At/Po-Belpahar(Rs), Dist : Jharsuguda Pan No. : Aagcs 4292 P Tan No. : Bbns00091 A (अऩीलाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) .. ननधाारिती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, Ar िाजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri M.K.Gautam, Citdr सुनवाई की तािीख / Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2021 घोषणा की तािीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 23/12/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench: These Three Appeals Have Been Filed By Three Different Assessees Against The Order Passed By The Pr.Cit, Sambalpur, U/S.263 Of The Act, All Dated 30.03.2019 For The Assessment Year 2014-2015. 2

For Appellant: Shri Satyanarayan Agarwal, ARFor Respondent: Shri M.K.Gautam, CITDR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263Section 80I

…ome Tax(Appeals) is in accordance with the law. " [Emphasis Supplied} 110 ITA Nos.193-195/CTK/2019 • The appellant also places reliance on the following judicial precedents in support of its contention: CIT v. U. P. Electronics Corpn. Ltd. reported in [2017} 397 ITR 113 (Allahabad) Eicher Motors Ltd. v. CIT-III reported in [2017} 39B ITR 51 (Delhi) HT Media Ltd. v. Pr. CIT-IV, New Delhi reported in [2017} 399 ITR 576 (Delhi) Pr. CIT Vadodara-I v. Gujarat State Fertilizers And Chemicals Ltd. reported in [2019} 416 ITR 13 (Gujarat) Pr. CIT v. CIMS Hospital (P.) Ltd. reported in [2021} 125 taxmann.com 227 (Gujarat)…

RAIN CEMENTS LIMITED (FORMERLY KNOWN AS RAIN CII CARBON INDIA LIMITED ),HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1471/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…rded any satisfaction contemplated u/s.14A(ii) qua its books of accounts that no such expenditure had been incurred in the relevant previous year. He has quoted Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Vs. ACIT [125 taxmann.com 80] (Kar), CIT Vs. UP Electronic Corpn. Ltd. (397 ITR 113) (All) and CIT Vs. I.P.Support Services India (P) Ltd. [88 taxmann.com 418] (Del) that such a satisfaction is very much mandatory before disallowance computation mechanism envisaged under Rule 8D of the Rules comes into play. Learned counsel further emphasised that the Assessing Officer had not made any such disallowances upto AY.2011-12 in forme…

RAIN CEMENTS LIMITED, HYDERABAD,HYDERABAD vs. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2020/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…rded any satisfaction contemplated u/s.14A(ii) qua its books of accounts that no such expenditure had been incurred in the relevant previous year. He has quoted Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Vs. ACIT [125 taxmann.com 80] (Kar), CIT Vs. UP Electronic Corpn. Ltd. (397 ITR 113) (All) and CIT Vs. I.P.Support Services India (P) Ltd. [88 taxmann.com 418] (Del) that such a satisfaction is very much mandatory before disallowance computation mechanism envisaged under Rule 8D of the Rules comes into play. Learned counsel further emphasised that the Assessing Officer had not made any such disallowances upto AY.2011-12 in forme…

RAIN INDUSTRIES LIMITED,HYDERABAD vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-3(1), HYDERABAD

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1950/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…rded any satisfaction contemplated u/s.14A(ii) qua its books of accounts that no such expenditure had been incurred in the relevant previous year. He has quoted Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. Vs. ACIT [125 taxmann.com 80] (Kar), CIT Vs. UP Electronic Corpn. Ltd. (397 ITR 113) (All) and CIT Vs. I.P.Support Services India (P) Ltd. [88 taxmann.com 418] (Del) that such a satisfaction is very much mandatory before disallowance computation mechanism envisaged under Rule 8D of the Rules comes into play. Learned counsel further emphasised that the Assessing Officer had not made any such disallowances upto AY.2011-12 in forme…

SHRI RAMNIKLAL H. AMBANI,,AHMEDABAD vs. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-5(2),, AHMEDABAD

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3202/AHD/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad15 Oct 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Waseem Ahmedआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 3202/Ahd/2016 "नधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2013-14 Ramniklal H. Ambani, Vs. Dcit, Vimal House, 7 Gadhvi Society, Circle – 5(2), Navrangpura, Ahmedabad. Ahmedabad. Pan No. Aalpa 6303 R अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Sameer Jani, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R. सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10.09.2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement : 15.10.2018 आदेश/O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed: The Captioned Appeal Has Been Filed At The Instance Of The Assessee Against The Appellate Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-5, Ahmedabad [“Cit(A)” In Short] Relevant To Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:- “1. The Learned Cit (A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts In Partly Confirming The Assessment Order Passed By The Assessing Officer U/S 143(3) Of The Act. 2. The Learned Cit(A) Has Erred In Law & On Facts On The Issue Of Disallowance Under Section 14A Without Considering The Contention Of The Appellant. The Appellant'S Contention That Majority Of The Investment In Shares Are Made Before Many Years Is Neglected By The Ld.Cit(A). The Ld.Cit(A) Has Conveniently Misrepresented The Fact In His Order That No Bifurcation With Regards To Stock In Trade & Investments Is Given Even Though Separate Figures Were Given During Appellate Proceedings. The 2 Ramniklal H. Ambai Vs. Dcit Ay : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Sameer Jani, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Kamlesh Makwana, Sr. D.R
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…accounts. Therefore, in our considered view, the disallowance of the expenses cannot be made. 8.5 In holding so, we find support and guidance from the judgment of Hon’ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT vs. UP Electronics Corporation Ltd. reported in 397 ITR 113, wherein, it was held as under: “24. This exposition of law prior to introduction of section 14A of the Act, 1961 was when an assessee had a composite and indivisible business which had elements of both taxable and non-taxable income, the entire expenditure in the said business was deductible and in such case, principle of apportionment of expend…

DCIT, BANGALORE vs. M/S BOSCH LIMITED, BANGALORE

In the result, the assessee's appeals are partly allowed and revenue’s appeal for the A

ITA 750/BANG/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore06 Nov 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Rao

For Appellant: Shri K.P. Kumar, Senior AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Parbat, CIT-III (D.R)
Section 23

…In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Microlabs Ltd. (supra) as well as the decision of Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of CIT Vs. UP Electronics Corporation Limited 397 ITR 113. The Learned Senior Counsel for the Assessee has submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has specifically observed that when the assessee has shown interest free fund then even if the investment is made out of common pool of fund and non-interest bearing fund was more than the investment in the tax free securities, no disallowance of interest expen…