CIT Vs. M/s Shreepati Holdings & Finance Pvt Ltd. 1879 of 2013. 7. ACIT v. Delite Enterprises (P) Ltd.

135 TTJ 663Income Tax Appellate Tribunal#22441 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2023.

Judgments citing CIT Vs. M/s Shreepati Holdings & Finance Pvt Ltd. 1879 of 2013. 7. ACIT v. Delite Enterprises (P) Ltd.

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax 1(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Varsity Education Management Private Limited, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1109/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Jan 2023AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh & Shri Gagan Goyalacit-1(3)(2), Room No. 540, 5Th Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 ...... Appellant Vs. M/S Varsity Education Mgt. Pvt. Ltd. 6A/1, Court Chambers, 35, New Marine Lines, Mumbai-400020. Pan: Aadcv6100E ..... Respondent Appellant By : Vranda U Matkarni, Sr.-Dr Respondent By : None Date Of Hearing : 17/10/2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 13/01/2023 Order Per Gagan Goyal, A.M: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3, Mumbai [For Short ‘Cit(A)’] Dated 25.10.2017 Under Section 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (For Short ‘The Act’) For A.Y. 2014-15. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Ground Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Vranda U Matkarni, Sr.-DRFor Respondent: None

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ts emanated we can reasonably conclude that when there is no exempt income during the year under consideration no disallowance can be made. In this regard we rely on the decision of honourable jurisdictional high court in the case of CIT Vs Delite Enterprises 135 TTJ 663 (2009). IT IS FURTHER observed that disallowance u/s 14A can’t exceed the exempt income earned by the assessee this, we rely on CIT Vs Walfort Share and Stock Brokers Pvt Ltd 326 ITR 001 (SC). 7. The order of AO we found to be on wrong foundation as there is no satisfaction has been brought on record while applying sec 14A before rejecting assess…

Sandeep P. Parikh, Mumbai vs. Pr. CIT -16, Mumbai

In the result, assessee’s appeal stands allowed

ITA 678/MUM/2021[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadalesandeep P. Parikh Vs. Pr. Cit- 16 B-6, Anand Bhavan, Room No. 437, 4Th Bajaj Road, Vile Parle Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, (W), Mumbai – 400056 Mk Road, Mumbai – 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aajpp8447R Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By : Shri. Pankaj Toprani.Ar Respondent By : Shri Ajay. K. Srivastava.Dr Date Of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date Of Pronouncement 20.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R Per Pavan Kumar Gadale Jm: The Assessee Has Filed The Appeal Against The Order Of The Principle Commissioner Of Income Tax (Pr.Cit)-16, Mumbai Passed U/Sec 263 Of The Act, 1961. At The Time Of Hearing, The Ld.Ar Of The Assessee Submitted That There Is A Delay In Filing The Appeal Before The Hon’Ble Tribunal Due To Covid-19 Pandemic. The Assessee Has Filed An Affidavit For Condonation Of Sandeep P. Parikh, Mumbai. Delay & We Find The Facts Mentioned In The Affidavit Are Reasonable & Acceptable. The Ld.Dr Has No Specific Objections. Accordingly, We Condone The Delay & Admit The Appeal.The Assessee Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal:

For Appellant: Shri. Pankaj Toprani.ARFor Respondent: Shri Ajay. K. Srivastava.DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263Section 28

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “G” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER Sandeep P. Parikh Vs. Pr. CIT- 16 B-6, Anand Bhavan, Room No. 437, 4th Bajaj Road, Vile Parle Floor, Aayakar bhavan, (W), Mumbai – 400056 MK Road, Mumbai – 400020. "थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./PAN/GIR No. : AAJPP8447R Appellant .. Respondent Appellant by : Shri. Pankaj Toprani.AR Respondent by : Shri Ajay. K. Srivastava.DR Date of Hearing 24.03.2022 Date of Pronouncement 20.04.2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER PAVAN KUMAR GADALE JM: The assessee has filed the appeal against…

Saurashtra Fuels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 3(3), Mumbai

In the result, assessee appeal in ITA No 7274/Mum/2012 for assessment year 2009-10 is partly allowed

ITA 7273/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jun 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Respondent: Shri Ritesh Mishra(D.R.)

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80M

…9 ITR 204(P&H HC) e) CIT v. Hero Cycles 323 ITR 518(P&H) f) Voltas Limited v. JCIT 125 TTJ 601(Mum.) g) K.J.Arora v. DCIT 180 Taxman 131(Del.) h) Dishman Pharmaceuticals & Chemicals Limited v. DCIT 45 SOT 37(Ahd.) i) ACIT v. Delite Enterprises Private Limited 135 TTJ 663(Mum.) j) Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited 328 ITR 81 (Bom.) The assessee company further submitted that out of total expenditure of Rs 314.76 crores, the direct expenditure on purchase of goods , material consumed and operational expenditure was Rs.306.33 crores, which is evident from the financial statements. The administrative ex…