DCIT v. Bombay Oxygen Corporation Ltd.

86 Taxmann 88Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2017#25764 most cited
3

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 341,001 Indian tax judgments — from 2025 to 2026.

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 10(34)Section 115JBSection 143(3)Section 250Section 8D

Issues it is cited on

disallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 14aprevious yearsection 14indiadocument

Judgments citing DCIT v. Bombay Oxygen Corporation Ltd.

Nuvama Wealth Management Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 6761/MUM/2025[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2015-16
Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…hich yield exempt income during the year. Further, the Spl Bench decision has been followed in a number of other judgements such as (i) Sajjan India Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2018) 89 Тахтапп.com 21 (Миm Tribunal), (ii) DCIT vs. Bombay Oxygen Corporation Ltd. (2017) 86 Taxmann 88 (Mum Tribunal), (iii) Tata Power Co Ltd. vs PCIT, Mumbai (2020), 121 Тахтапп.com 127 (Mum Tribunal) 10.3 With the Spl. Bench decision in the case of Vireet Investment Ltd. (supra), law with respect to computation of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Act is settled and the quantum of disallowance has to be limited to the extent of inves…

Nuvama Wealth Management Limited, Mumbai vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax-1(1), Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are

ITA 6760/MUM/2025[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Feb 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Om Prakash Kant (Account Member) & Ms. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

For Respondent: Shri Ravikant Pathak
Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…hich yield exempt income during the year. Further, the Spl Bench decision has been followed in a number of other judgements such as (i) Sajjan India Ltd. vs. Addi.CIT (2018) 89 Taxmann.com 21 (Mum Tribunal), (ii) DCIT vs. Bombay Oxygen Corporation Ltd. (2017) 86 Taxmann 88 (Mum Tribunal), (iii) Tata Power Co Ltd. vs PCIT, Mumbai (2020), 121 Taxmann.com 127 (Mum Tribunal) 10.3 With the Spl. Bench decision in the case of Vireet Investment Ltd. (supra), law with respect to computation of disallowance under Rule 8D(2)(iii) of the Act is settled and the quantum of disallowance has to be limited to the extent of invest…

DCIT Central Circle-1(1), Mumbai vs. Dentsu Aegis Network India Prviate Limited, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6123/MUM/2025[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Dec 2025AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri Anikesh Banerjee & Shri Prabhash Shankar

For Appellant: Shri A.K. JawadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Umashankar Prasad (CIT DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 250

…hich yield exempt income during the year. Further, the Spl Bench decision has been followed in a number of other judgements such as (i) Sajjan India Ltd. vs. Addl.CIT (2018) 89 Taxmann.com 21 (Mum Tribunal), (ii) DCIT vs. Bombay Oxygen Corporation Ltd. (2017) 86 Taxmann 88 (Mum Tribunal), (iii) Tata Power Co Ltd. vs PCIT, Mumbai (2020), 121 Taxmann.com 127 (Mum Tribunal). 9.1.2 The Hon’ble Special Bench of Delhi Tribunal in the case of ACIT vs. Vireet Investments Pvt. Ltd. ITA No.502/Del/2012, have held that for the purposes of calculating disallowance as per Rule 8D(2)(iii), only those investments are to be cons…

DCIT v. Bombay Oxygen Corporation Ltd. (86 Taxmann 88) — Cited in 3 Judgments | BharatTax