CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.

326 ITR 1Supreme Court of India2010#116 most cited

What is CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. authority for?

For attracting Section 14A disallowance, there must be a proximate cause relating the expenditure to actual tax-exempt income, and such disallowance is not automatic but requires positive material. Additionally, Section 94(7) on dividend stripping only ignores losses to the extent of dividend received for assessment years post-April 1, 2002, allowing the remaining loss.

543

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2011 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers P. Ltd. · 326 ITR 1 · Section 14A disallowance · proximate cause exempt income · not automatic disallowance · actual exempt income · Section 94(7) · dividend stripping · loss ignored to extent of dividend · tax-exempt income expenditure

Also reported as

192 Taxmann 21141 DTR 233

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 94(7)Section 10(35)Section 133ASection 148Section 148ASection 48
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(1)strategic investmentsection 14a(2)section 10(34)disallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 14asection 80iamercantile system of accountingsection 115jbsection 115jrevenue expenditure

Judgments citing CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.

Sigma Corporation India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee stands allowed for

ITA 4760/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi01 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiassessment Year : 2011-12 Sigma Corporation India Ltd., Vs Dcit, R-561, Shankar Road, Circle-8(1), New Rajinder Nagar, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aabcs8026L) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Shri Baljit Singh, Ca Respondent By : Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. Dr O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Baljit Singh, CAFor Respondent: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 14A

…that whether or not expenses were incurred for earning exempt income was a question of fact. Reliance was also placed on the judgment of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers (P) Ltd. reported in 326 ITR 1 I.T.A. No. 4760/Del/2014 Assessment year 2011-12 (SC) for the proposition that for attracting section 14A, there has to be a proximate cause for disallowance which is its relationship with the exempt income. It was submitted that in view of settled judicial precedents, the disallowance was bad in law and needed to be deleted. 4. In response, t…

Corrtech Energy Ltd., (Formerly Known As Mjb India Gas Turbine Services Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT, (OSD), Range-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3433/AHD/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad30 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia & Shri Mahavir Prasadआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.3443/Ahd/2014 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2010-11)

For Appellant: Shri G.C. Pipara, ARFor Respondent: Shri Mudit Nagpal, Sr.DR
Section 14A

…h Energy Ltd. vs. DCIT Asst.Year – 2010-11 facts and settled legal position that section 14A cannot be applied unless there is proximate cause for disallowance as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. 326 ITR 1 (SO. The impugned addition of Rs.7,81,321/- thus ought to have been deleted. 4. The Id. C1T(A) has further erred in not appreciating and/or ignoring the fact that identical issue i.e. disallowance u/s.!4A of the Act has been decided in favor of the appellant in its own case for previous year i.e. A.Y.2009-10 by the Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad Bench as…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Ceebros Property Development Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 297/CHNY/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A.Mohan Alankamony & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 250(6)

…for the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, the basic ingredient as envisaged in s.14A that being, the expenditure incurred in relation to income not includible in total income was not satisfied. In the case of Walfort Share & Stock Brokers P Ltd 326 ITR 1, summarized by the AD in para 2.8 of the assessment order itself shows the non-application of s.14A of the Act to the facts of the present case. In the case of the appellant as has been stated earlier there was no expenditure in relation to income which. does not form part of the total income. This fact is clear as the appellant has accounted for t…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Avh Resourses India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the Department’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 5374/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi25 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishiay: 2010-11 Ito, Vs Avh Resourses India Pvt. Ltd., Ward 2(2), D-139, First Floor, East Of Kailash, Intl. Tax, New Delhi-110065 New Delhi. (Pan: Aadcb2711K) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. Dr Respondent By: None

For Appellant: Shri Atiq Ahmad, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 14A(3)

…ould not point out any factual or 5 AY : 2010-11 legal error in the findings arrived at by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A). The Hon’ble Apex Court has held in Commissioner of Income Tax(A) vs Walfort Share and Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. reported in (2010) 326 ITR 1(SC) that while attracting the provisions of section 14A, there should be a proximate cause for disallowance which has a relationship with a tax exempt income. Such a proximate cause has not been brought out by the department neither in the assessment order nor during the course of proceedings before us. Therefore, we find no reason to interfere…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. M/S Tolaram Satyadev Agro Pvt. Ltd., Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 672/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2017AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 14A

…providing that no deduction shall be allowable in respect of expenditure incurred in relation to the earning of income exempt from taxation. As observed by the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 1/192 Taxman 211. ……The mandate of s. 14A is clear. It desires to curb the practice to claim deduction of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income against taxable income and at the same time avail of• the tax incentive by way of an exemption of exempt income without making any apportionment of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income.' 10…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. Sudha Hospital & Medical Research Centre, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 671/JPR/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2017AY 2014-15
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl.CIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 14A

…providing that no deduction shall be allowable in respect of expenditure incurred in relation to the earning of income exempt from taxation. As observed by the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of CIT v. Watfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 1/192 Taxman 211. ... The mandate of s. 14A is clear It desires to curb the practice to claim deduction of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income against taxable income and at the same time avail of the tax incentive by way of an exemption of exempt income without making any apportionment of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income.' 10…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kota vs. M/S Naresh Kumar Manoj Kumar, Kota

In the result, appeal of the revenue stands dismissed

ITA 670/JPR/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur09 Oct 2017AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri P.C. Parwal (CA)For Respondent: Smt. Poonam Roy (DCIT) fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@
Section 145(3)Section 14A

…providing that no deduction shall be allowable in respect of expenditure incurred in relation to the earning of income exempt from taxation. As observed by the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 1/192 Taxman 211. …….' The mandate of s. 14A is clear. It desires to curb the practice to claim deduction of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income against taxable income and at the same time avail of the tax incentive by way of an exemption of exempt income without making any apportionment of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income.'…

Shyamala Pictures and Hotel Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1185/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 04.07.2017
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 28

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘सी’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH ‘C’, CHENNAI "ी संजय अरोड़ा, लेखा सद"य एवं "ी जी. जॉज" माथन, "या"यक सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI SANJAY ARORA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA No.1185/Mds/2015 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Shyamala Pictures and Hotel Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Commissioner of Income Shyamala Towers, 136, Arcot Road, Vs. Tax, Saligramam, Media Range, Chennai - 600 093. Chennai – 600 034. [PAN: AABCS 0267K] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) Shri S.Sridhar, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से / Appellant by : Shri A…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Rds Projects Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 1182/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. K. N. Chary, Jm Ita No. 1182/Del/2016 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Rds Projects Ltd., Tax, Circle-21(2), 427, Somdutt Chambers-Ii, 9, Bhikaji New Delhi Cama Palace, New Delhi-110066 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaacr4761J Assessee By : None Revenue By : Sh. S. P. Gupta, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 14.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 14.12.2015 Of Ld. Cit(A)-7, New Delhi.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Sh. S. P. Gupta, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 14A

…s of the appellant's 5 RDS Projects Ltd. claim in respect of expenditure disallowed or not incurred to attract the mischief of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act (Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT 347 ITR 272 (Del), CIT vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd. 326 ITR 1, CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd. 323 ITR 518, CIT vs. Consolidated Photo and Finvest Ltd. 211 Taxman 184). The disallowance made by the AO therefore, is not in order. 3.3. As stated above, the disallowance computed by the AO is far in excess of the exempt income disclosed by the appellant i.e. Rs.7,000/-. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint…

ITO, Namakkal vs. Tiruchengode Agricultural Producers Co-Operative Marketing Society Limited, Namakkal

In the result, the Revenues’ appeals are allowed and the assessee’s COs, dismissed

ITA 363/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 02.08.2017
Section 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)

…ts – as allocable to the relevant activity (being apportioned on gross income basis), has to be deducted to arrive at the income earned on the relevant advances. Income, after all, is only net of expenses (CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 1 (SC); Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 81 (Bom)) and it is only the income as included in the gross total income (GTI) on which deduction under Chapter VI-A is allowable (s. 80AB), and toward which the Revenue relies on the decision in Sabarkantha Zilla Kharid Venchan Sangh Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 203 ITR 1027 (SC), a principle rei…

ITO, Namakkal vs. Tiruchengode Agricultural Producers Co-Operative Marketing Society Limited, Namakkal

In the result, the Revenues’ appeals are allowed and the assessee’s COs, dismissed

ITA 362/CHNY/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai22 Sept 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: 02.08.2017
Section 80P(1)Section 80P(2)(a)

…ts – as allocable to the relevant activity (being apportioned on gross income basis), has to be deducted to arrive at the income earned on the relevant advances. Income, after all, is only net of expenses (CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 1 (SC); Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2010] 328 ITR 81 (Bom)) and it is only the income as included in the gross total income (GTI) on which deduction under Chapter VI-A is allowable (s. 80AB), and toward which the Revenue relies on the decision in Sabarkantha Zilla Kharid Venchan Sangh Ltd. v. CIT [1993] 203 ITR 1027 (SC), a principle rei…

Camac Leathers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT-Ccircle-8, Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 815/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…, Ld. CIT(A) disregarded the contention of assessee and confirmed the order of AO by observing as under:- “I have carefully considered the submissions put forth on behalf of the appellant. In CIT v. Wallfort Share & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd.[2010] 192 Taxman 211/326 ITR 1 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that Words ‘expenditure incurred’ in section 14A refer to expenditure on rent, taxes, ITA No.815 & 646/Kol/2012 A.Y. 2008-09 Camac Leathers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT(A)-VIII Kol. Page 4 salaries, interest, etc., in respect of which allowances are provided under sections 30 to 37, a return of investment or a pay bac…

ITO, Ward - 8(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Camac Leathers Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, Revenue’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 646/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Sept 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Aby.T Varkey & Shri Waseem Ahmed

Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…, Ld. CIT(A) disregarded the contention of assessee and confirmed the order of AO by observing as under:- “I have carefully considered the submissions put forth on behalf of the appellant. In CIT v. Wallfort Share & Stock Brokers (P) Ltd.[2010] 192 Taxman 211/326 ITR 1 (SC), the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that Words ‘expenditure incurred’ in section 14A refer to expenditure on rent, taxes, ITA No.815 & 646/Kol/2012 A.Y. 2008-09 Camac Leathers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT(A)-VIII Kol. Page 4 salaries, interest, etc., in respect of which allowances are provided under sections 30 to 37, a return of investment or a pay bac…

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

ITA/549/2015HC Delhi23 Aug 2017

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

Section 10Section 142Section 143Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 260

…t, the constant tug-of-war lies in the Revenue wanting to increase the expenditure incurred to earn exempt income for the purpose of disallowance, while the Assessee seeks to establish the opposite. In CIT v. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 1 (SC), the Supreme Court noted that legislative intent behind Section 14A was not to allow deduction in respect of any expenditure incurred by an Assessee in relation to exempt income, i.e. income which does not form part of the total income under the said Act, against the taxable income. The Supreme Court observed as under: "In other words, s…

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

ITA/520/2017HC Delhi16 Aug 2017

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

Section 115JSection 14ASection 260

…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.…

Rel Utility Engimeers Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7177/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Crest Logistics & Addl. Cit-10(1), Engineers Private Limited, [New Jurisdiction Addl. Cit (Erstwhile Rel Utility 14(3)(1)] Engineers Ltd. Formerly Known Aayakar Bhavan, As Rel Utility Engineers Ltd. M.K. Road, Vs. Formerly Known As Mumbai - 400020 Sonata Investments Ltd.), Devidas Lane, Near Mtnl, Off Svp Road, Borivali (W) – 400 103 Pan: Aaccr 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Crest Logistic & Tax-14(1)(2), Engineering Ltd., Room No.470, 4Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sonata Aayakar Bhavan, Investments Ltd.) Maharshi Karve Road, Vs. 307, Charted House, Mumbai - 400020 297/299, Dr. Cawasji Hormosji Street, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 002 Pan: Aaccr 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Pruseth, D.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Crest Logistics and Addl. CIT-10(1), Engineers Private Limited, [New Jurisdiction Addl. CIT (Erstwhile REL Utility 14(3)(1)] Engineers Ltd. Formerly known Aayakar Bhavan, as REL Utility Engineers Ltd. M.K. Road, Vs. Formerly known as Mumbai - 400020 Sonata Investments Ltd.), Devidas Lane, Near MTNL, Off SVP Road, Borivali (W) – 400 103 PAN: AACCR 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of Income M/s. Crest L…

DCIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Sonata Investments Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6931/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Crest Logistics & Addl. Cit-10(1), Engineers Private Limited, [New Jurisdiction Addl. Cit (Erstwhile Rel Utility 14(3)(1)] Engineers Ltd. Formerly Known Aayakar Bhavan, As Rel Utility Engineers Ltd. M.K. Road, Vs. Formerly Known As Mumbai - 400020 Sonata Investments Ltd.), Devidas Lane, Near Mtnl, Off Svp Road, Borivali (W) – 400 103 Pan: Aaccr 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Crest Logistic & Tax-14(1)(2), Engineering Ltd., Room No.470, 4Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sonata Aayakar Bhavan, Investments Ltd.) Maharshi Karve Road, Vs. 307, Charted House, Mumbai - 400020 297/299, Dr. Cawasji Hormosji Street, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 002 Pan: Aaccr 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Pruseth, D.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Crest Logistics and Addl. CIT-10(1), Engineers Private Limited, [New Jurisdiction Addl. CIT (Erstwhile REL Utility 14(3)(1)] Engineers Ltd. Formerly known Aayakar Bhavan, as REL Utility Engineers Ltd. M.K. Road, Vs. Formerly known as Mumbai - 400020 Sonata Investments Ltd.), Devidas Lane, Near MTNL, Off SVP Road, Borivali (W) – 400 103 PAN: AACCR 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of Income M/s. Crest L…

M/S. Svp Industries Ltd., Muzaffarnagar vs. DCIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 5646/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: : Smt. Diva Singh & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 14A

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘G’, New Delhi Before : Smt. Diva Singh, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 5646/Del./2013 Assessment Year: 2009-10 SVP Industries Ltd., Mansoorpur, vs. D.C.I.T., Circle 19, Muzaffarnagar.(PAN-AAECS3637C) New Delhi. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Sh. Balwant Singh, Advocate Revenue by Sh. S.S. Rana, CIT/DR Date of Hearing 01.06.2017 Date of Pronouncement 06.07.2017 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This is an appeal by the assessee against the order of ld. CIT(A)-XXXIII, New Delhi dated 24.06.2013 for the assessment year 2009-10 on the…

M/S. Kal Airways Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2847/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2846 & 2847/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. K. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 10(33)Section 14A

…tion shall be allowable in respect of expenditure incurred in relation to the earning of income exempt from taxation. As observed by the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers (P) Ltd (2010) 326 ITR 1 '.... The mandate of s.14A is clear. It desires to curb the practice to claim deduction of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income against taxable income and at the same time avail of the tax incentive by way of an exemption of exempt income without making any apportionment of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income.' 10.The provisio…

M/S. Kal Airways Pvt. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee for both the assessment years are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2846/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai30 Jun 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Abraham P. George] आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos. 2846 & 2847/Mds/2016 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years : 2011-12 & 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri. K. Ramakrishnan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. Pathlavath Peerya, CIT
Section 10(33)Section 14A

…tion shall be allowable in respect of expenditure incurred in relation to the earning of income exempt from taxation. As observed by the Supreme Court in the judgment in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers (P) Ltd (2010) 326 ITR 1 '.... The mandate of s.14A is clear. It desires to curb the practice to claim deduction of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income against taxable income and at the same time avail of the tax incentive by way of an exemption of exempt income without making any apportionment of expenses incurred in relation to exempt income.' 10.The provisio…