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.

How many judgments cite CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd.?

543 judgments on BharatTax cite CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (326 ITR 1), spanning 2011 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 94(7), Section 10(35), Section 133A, Section 148.

CIT v. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers (P.) Ltd. (326 ITR 1)

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 222/VIZ/2022[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [PAN : AADCK0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.…

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 221/VIZ/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [PAN : AADCK0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 81/VIZ/2021[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [PAN : AADCK0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.…

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

In the result, appeals filed by the revenue in I

ITA 80/VIZ/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Visakhapatnam15 Jun 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon’Ble & Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon’Bleआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner Of Income Tax Vs. M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [Pan : Aadck0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.221/Viz/2022 To 223/Viz/2022 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16) M/S K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Vs. Dy.Commissioner Of D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Income Tax Balabhadrapuram Circle-1 East Godavari Kakinada [Pan : Aadck0257B] अपीलधथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Shri G.V.N.Hari, Ar Shri A.Chakradhar, Ar प्रत्यधथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri On Hari Prasada Rao, Dr सुनवधई की तधरीख / Date Of Hearing : 20.03.2023 घोर्णध की तधरीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 15.06.2023 आदेश /O R D E R Per Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy:

For Appellant: Shri G.V.N.Hari, ARFor Respondent: Shri ON Hari Prasada Rao, DR

Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 80I

…आयकरअपीलीयअधिकरण, धिशाखापटणम पीठ, धिशाखापटणम IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM श्री दुव्वूरु आर एल रेड्डी, न्याधयक सदस्य एिं श्री एस बालाकृष्णन, लेखा सदस्य के समक्ष BEFORE SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, HON’BLE JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI S BALAKRISHNAN, HON’BLE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.80/Viz/2021 & 81/Viz/2021 (ननधधारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2016-17 & 2017-18) Dy.Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. M/s K.P.R.Agrochem Ltd Circle-1 D.No.8-256, Tata Nagar Kakinada Balabhadrapuram East Godavari [PAN : AADCK0257B] (अपीलार्थी/ Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.…

M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 334/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta

Section 92C

…to evade the tax through colourable device is not frowned upon even by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowells & Co. Ltd. (supra). Even in the subsequent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers Ltd. 326 ITR 1 (SC), applying the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr (supra) held that the transaction of dividend stripping held to be is not a sham and bogus and ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowells & Co. Ltd. (supra) cannot be applied. Similarly, after referring to the jud…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA

ITA 273/PUN/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune31 May 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Raviआयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.273/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 Dcit, Central Circle-2(2), Vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune. 601, Icc Trade Tower, Pune- 411016. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent आयकर अपीऱ सं. / Ita No.334/Pun/2021 निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17 M/S. Bilcare Limited, Vs. Dcit, Central Circle- 6Th Floor, B Wing, Icc 2(2), Pune. Trade Tower, Senapati Bapat Road, Pune- 411006. Pan : Aabcb2242F Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Kishor PhadkeFor Respondent: Shri Naveen Gupta

Section 92C

…to evade the tax through colourable device is not frowned upon even by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowells & Co. Ltd. (supra). Even in the subsequent decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers Ltd. 326 ITR 1 (SC), applying the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Union of India & Anr vs. Azadi Bachao Andolan & Anr (supra) held that the transaction of dividend stripping held to be is not a sham and bogus and ratio of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of McDowells & Co. Ltd. (supra) cannot be applied. Similarly, after referring to the jud…

ACIT Circle-28(1), New Delhi vs. Amar Raj Singh, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed”

ITA 9445/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi17 Apr 2023AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri M. Balaganesh

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 48

…5 present case of the Appellant, no expenses have been incurred to earn exempt income. On the other hand the Appellant has relied on another judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT v. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd. (2010) 192 Taxman 211/326 ITR 1, wherein Hon’ble Apex Court allowed the appeal in favour of the Assessee. The Walfort case relied on by the Appellant has identical facts as that of the Appellant’s case in respect of the Appellant’s contention. The facts of Walfort case and the Appellant’s case are identical in the sense that in both the cases assessee made investment in units of…

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)

…he CBDT Circular No.14 dated 11.11.2001, clarifying the provisions of Finance Bill 2001. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Calcutta Agency Limited, 19 ITR 191, CIT vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers (P) Limited, 326 ITR 1. The assessee has made suo moto disallowance of Rs.20,37,506/- at the time of purchase and sale of mutual fund. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer has not recorded satisfaction regarding incorrectness 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…

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)

…he CBDT Circular No.14 dated 11.11.2001, clarifying the provisions of Finance Bill 2001. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Calcutta Agency Limited, 19 ITR 191, CIT vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers (P) Limited, 326 ITR 1. The assessee has made suo moto disallowance of Rs.20,37,506/- at the time of purchase and sale of mutual fund. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer has not recorded satisfaction regarding incorrectness 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…

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)

…he CBDT Circular No.14 dated 11.11.2001, clarifying the provisions of Finance Bill 2001. The Ld. AR relied upon the decision of Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Calcutta Agency Limited, 19 ITR 191, CIT vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers (P) Limited, 326 ITR 1. The assessee has made suo moto disallowance of Rs.20,37,506/- at the time of purchase and sale of mutual fund. The Ld. AR submitted that the Assessing Officer has not recorded satisfaction regarding incorrectness 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…

ACIT - 21(2), Mumbai vs. Kalpana Shripal Morakhia, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3003/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Apr 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Hiro RaiFor Respondent: Shri Sandeep Raj

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 54F

…Asst. CIT v Biraj Investment P Ltd. 210 Taxman 418 (Guj), Bhoruka Engineering Industries Ltd. v DCIT 356 ITR 25 (Kar). DCIT v Mahendra M Mehta 89 TTJ 1 (Mum-Trib), ADIT v Maersk Line UK Ltd. 149 TTJ 537 (Kol-Trib). CIT vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers P Ltd. 326 ITR 1 (SC), Union of India v Azadi Bachao Andolan 263 ITR 706 (SC), CIT vs Special Prints Ltd. 356 ITR 404, DIT (International Taxation) vs Maersk Line UK Ltd. 270 CTR 545 (Cal.). 21. Considering totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, I donot find any justification in the action of the AO in disallowing short term capital loss of Rs. 23.44…

The Punjab Produce & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-4(2), Kolkata

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 518/KOL/2022[2017-2018]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata31 Mar 2023AY 2017-2018

Bench: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Girish Agrawalassessment Year: 2017-18 The Punjab Produce & Assistant Commissioner Of Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. Income-Tax, Circle-4(2), Birla Building, 4Th Floor, 9/1, Vs. Kolkata. R. N. Mukherjee Road, Kolkata-700001. (Pan: Aabct1705D) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Ms. Vidhi Ladia, CAFor Respondent: Shri P. P. Barman, Addl. CIT

Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14A

…of suo moto disallowance offered by the assessee is correct having regard to the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT (2018) 402 ITR 640 (SC) and CIT Vs. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers Pvt. Ltd. (2008) 326 ITR 1 (SC). The computation by assessee cannot be rejected on the ground that infrastructure or indirect costs have 9 The Punjab produce & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd. AY 2017-18 not been included, more particularly when they in fact have been included. Investment made during the year which may give rise to dividend income was only Rs.3.47 Cr. whereas investme…

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA डॉ. मनीष बोरड, लेखा सदस्य एवं श्री संजय शमाा, न्याधयक सदस्य के समक्ष Before DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1854/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Tata Global Beverages Limited.........................Appellant [PAN: AABCT 0602 K] Vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata.....................................Respondent I.T.A. No.: 1899/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Tata Global Beverages Limited.........................Appellant [PAN: AABCT 0602 K] Vs. D…

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

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण कोलकाता 'सी' पीठ, कोलकाता में IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA डॉ. मनीष बोरड, लेखा सदस्य एवं श्री संजय शमाा, न्याधयक सदस्य के समक्ष Before DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SONJOY SARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No.: 1854/Kol/2016 Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Tata Global Beverages Limited.........................Appellant [PAN: AABCT 0602 K] Vs. DCIT, Circle-4(2), Kolkata.....................................Respondent I.T.A. No.: 1899/Kol/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Tata Global Beverages Limited.........................Appellant [PAN: AABCT 0602 K] Vs. D…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 961/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…he AO would have no power to compute disallowance u/s 14A of the Act as per provision of Rule 8D of the Rules. In support of this, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on following judicial pronouncements:- [i] CIT vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers 326 ITR 1 (SC); [ii] Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom.); [iii] Maxopp Investment Ltd. 203 Taxman 364 (Del.); [iv] CIT vs Hero Cycles 323 ITR 518 (P&H); [v] CIT vs Metalman Auto P.Ltd. 336 ITR 434 (P&H); [vi] CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom.); [vii] CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd. 339 ITR 632 (Bom.); [ix] CIT vs Ms…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 1507/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2023AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2010-11] Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs Dcit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Circle-16(1), Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. New Delhi. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent [Assessment Year : 2010-11] Dcit, Vs Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, New Delhi. Vasant Kunj, New Delhi-110070. Pan-Aaacm0829Q Appellant Respondent Appellant By Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr.Adv., Shri Neeraj Jain, Adv. & Ms. Tejasvi Jain & Ms. Somya Jain, Ca Respondent By Shri G.C.Srivastava, Adv., Shri Kalrav Mehrotra, Adv. & Shri Mayank Patawari, Ca Date Of Hearing 11.11.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 09.02.2023

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 43Section 43B

…he AO would have no power to compute disallowance u/s 14A of the Act as per provision of Rule 8D of the Rules. In support of this, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has placed reliance on following judicial pronouncements:- [i] CIT vs Walfort Share & Stock Brokers 326 ITR 1 (SC); [ii] Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom.); [iii] Maxopp Investment Ltd. 203 Taxman 364 (Del.); [iv] CIT vs Hero Cycles 323 ITR 518 (P&H); [v] CIT vs Metalman Auto P.Ltd. 336 ITR 434 (P&H); [vi] CIT vs Reliance Utilities and Power Ltd. 313 ITR 340 (Bom.); [vii] CIT vs Reliance Industries Ltd. 339 ITR 632 (Bom.); [ix] CIT vs Ms…

Birla Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

ITA 497/KOL/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80I

…e exempt, the common expenses incurred in respect of such employees and infrastructure have to be necessarily apportioned between the taxable and exempt activities. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd., (2010) 326 ITR 1(SC) and in Maxopp’s case (supra), the principle of apportionment of expenses comes into play as that is the principle which is incorporated in section 14A of the Act. The assessee adopted a reasonable basis for such apportionment. The ld. AO did not find anything to dispute the assessee’s computation except for saying that it is not as per rule 8D.…

Birla Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT Cir.-6(1), Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

ITA 496/KOL/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80I

…e exempt, the common expenses incurred in respect of such employees and infrastructure have to be necessarily apportioned between the taxable and exempt activities. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd., (2010) 326 ITR 1(SC) and in Maxopp’s case (supra), the principle of apportionment of expenses comes into play as that is the principle which is incorporated in section 14A of the Act. The assessee adopted a reasonable basis for such apportionment. The ld. AO did not find anything to dispute the assessee’s computation except for saying that it is not as per rule 8D.…

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

ITA 2143/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80I

…e exempt, the common expenses incurred in respect of such employees and infrastructure have to be necessarily apportioned between the taxable and exempt activities. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd., (2010) 326 ITR 1(SC) and in Maxopp’s case (supra), the principle of apportionment of expenses comes into play as that is the principle which is incorporated in section 14A of the Act. The assessee adopted a reasonable basis for such apportionment. The ld. AO did not find anything to dispute the assessee’s computation except for saying that it is not as per rule 8D.…

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue for AYs 2013-14 &

ITA 2142/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata07 Feb 2023AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri Rajpal Yadav & Dr. Manish Borad

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250Section 80I

…e exempt, the common expenses incurred in respect of such employees and infrastructure have to be necessarily apportioned between the taxable and exempt activities. As held by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in CIT v. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd., (2010) 326 ITR 1(SC) and in Maxopp’s case (supra), the principle of apportionment of expenses comes into play as that is the principle which is incorporated in section 14A of the Act. The assessee adopted a reasonable basis for such apportionment. The ld. AO did not find anything to dispute the assessee’s computation except for saying that it is not as per rule 8D.…

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

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

Also referred to as

Also reported as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

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

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram vs. DCIT Circle-1, Kakinada

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-1, Kakinada vs. Kpr Agrochem Limited, Balabhadrapuram

M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Pune vs. M/S. Bilcare Limited, Pune

ACIT Circle-28(1), New Delhi vs. Amar Raj Singh, New Delhi

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

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

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

ACIT - 21(2), Mumbai vs. Kalpana Shripal Morakhia, Mumbai

The Punjab Produce & Trading Co. Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata vs. A.C.I.T., Circle-4(2), Kolkata

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

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

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi

Birla Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir.-6(1), Kolkata

Birla Corporation Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT Cir.-6(1), Kolkata

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata

DCIT, Circle - 6(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Birla Corporation Ltd., Kolkata