CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd.

319 ITR 204High Court2009#196 most cited

What is CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. authority for?

Section 14A of the Income-tax Act, 1961, which disallows expenditure incurred in relation to exempt income, is not applicable if the assessee has not earned any exempt income in the relevant assessment year.

378

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. · 319 ITR 204 · Section 14A · disallowance · exempt income · no exempt income · Rule 8D · assessment year · business expenditure · Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd.

ACIT, Sambalpur vs. Smt. Indrani Patnaik, Rourkela

In the result, appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 219/CTK/2023[2019-20]Status: DisposedITAT Cuttack06 Aug 2024AY 2019-20

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Manish Agarwalआयकर अऩीऱ सं/Ita No.219/Ctk/2023 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2019-2020) Acit, Sambalpur Vs Smt. Indrani Patnaik, A-6, Comercial Estate, Civil Township, Rourkela Pan No. :Accpp 6164 E (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri Sanjay Kumar, Cit-Dr ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee By : Shri S.C.Bhadra, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 06/08/2024 घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement : 06/08/2024 आदेश / O R D E R Per Bench : This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Ld. Cit(A)-2, Bhubaneswar, Dated 29.03.2023, Passed In I.T.Appeal No.Bhubaneswar-2/10625/2018-19 For The Assessment Year 2019-2020, On The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- 1. The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Made Towards Peripheral Development Charges Of Rs. 49,49,231/- As Such Expenditure Is Not Allowable As Per The Provisions Of Section 37 Of The Act. 2. The Cit(A) Erred In Deleting The Addition Of Rs. 10,69,56,849/- U/S 14A As The Assessee Has Exempt Income During The Year. 3. The Cit(A) Was Not Correct In Deleting The Addition U/S 14A Holding That Satisfaction Is Not Recorded By The Ao, When The Assessee Has Not Suomoto Disallowed Any Expenditure Related To Earning Exempt Income As Decided By The Hon'Ble Supreme Court In The Case Of Maxopp Investment Ltd Dtd 12.02.2018. 4. The Cit(A) Was Not Correct In Deleting The Addition U/S 14A, When The Ao Has Given A Finding In The Assessment Order That The Assessee Has Shown Investment That Yielded Tax Free

For Appellant: Shri S.C.Bhadra, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, CIT-DR
Section 132Section 135Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 37Section 37(1)

…peals) and Tribunal, impugned order passed by said authorities was to be affirmed - Held, yes 16. Reliance can also be placed on the decision of the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd., reported in [2009] 319 ITR 204 (P&H) and on the decision of Hon’ble Gujarat High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Suzlon Energy Ltd (Gujarat) in Tax Appeal No.223 of 2013, dated 03.04.2013. 17. In view of the above discussion and considering the fact that the assessee is having interest free funds available with her in the shape of own capital which is sufficient to cover the valu…

ACIT, Corporate Circle-3(1), Chennai vs. M/S Tvs Motor Company Limited, Chennai

In the result the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6/CHNY/2023[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai29 May 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh & Shri Amitabh Shuklaआयकर अपील िं./Ita No. 06/Chny/2023 निर्धारण वर्ा /Assessment Year: 2016-17. The Asst. Commissioner Of M/S. Tvs Motor Company Ltd., Income Tax, Vs. Chaitanya, No.12, Corporate Circle-3(1), Khader Nawaz Khan Road, Chennai. Nungambakkam, Chennai – 600 006. [Pan: Aaacs7032B] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/Respondent) अपीलधर्थी की ओर से/ Assessee By : Shri Vikaram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से /Revenue By : Shri A. Sasikumar, Cit ुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 01.05.2024 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 29.05.2024 आदेश / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Vikaram VijayaraghavanFor Respondent: Shri A. Sasikumar, CIT
Section 12Section 153(1)Section 250(6)Section 9Section 92C

…sidered, in the judgement, the applicability of Rule 8D for the said year. 8.8 Ld. Counsel also relied on the following decisions: - CIT v. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd. (2015) 55 taxmann.com 262/230 Taxman 63 (All.); - CIT v. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd.(2009) 319 ITR 204 (Punj. & Har.) 11.16 There, in our considered opinion, no contrary view can be taken under these circumstances. We, accordingly, hold that only those investment s are to be considered for computing average value of investment which yielded exempt income during the year. 11.17 As far as argument relating to meaning to be ascribed to the phrase ‘s…