DCIT v. EIH Associated Hotels Limited

126 TTJ 246Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2009#9352 most cited

What is DCIT v. EIH Associated Hotels Limited authority for?

Disallowance under section 14A read with rule 8D is restricted to 1% of exempted income where advances in the form of share application money were made to a subsidiary to facilitate the assessee's own financial interest.

11

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,005 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2018.

Also referred to as

DCIT v. EIH Associated Hotels Limited · 126 TTJ 246 · Section 14A · Rule 8D · exempted income · disallowance · share application money · subsidiary · financial interest · section 36(1)(iii)

Judgments citing DCIT v. EIH Associated Hotels Limited

M/S. Simpson & Co. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 171/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.170 & 171/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri ARV Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: 19.02.2019
Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.170 & 171/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s. Simpson & Co. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 861/862, Anna Salai, (LTU-II), Chennai – 600 002. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 4909F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri ARV Sreenivasan, JCI…

M/S. Simpson & Co. Ltd., Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 170/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Feb 2018AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.170 & 171/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri ARV Sreenivasan, JCITFor Respondent: 19.02.2019
Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI "ी एन.आर.एस. गणेशन, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी इंटूर" रामा राव, लेखा सद"य के सम" BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ITA Nos.170 & 171/Chny/2018 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s. Simpson & Co. Ltd., Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax 861/862, Anna Salai, (LTU-II), Chennai – 600 002. Chennai. [PAN:AAACS 4909F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) : Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri ARV Sreenivasan, JCI…

D.C.I.T Cir - 10, Kolkata vs. M/S Ici India Ltd, Kolkata

ITA 2121/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 50B

…total disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules worked out to Rs. 2,30,90,922/-. In appeal, the ld CIT(A) by placing reliance on the co-ordinate bench decision of this tribunal in the case of EIH Associated Hotels Ltd vs DCIT reported in 126 TTJ 246 (Kol Trib) held that only 1% of exempted income needs to be disallowed in the instant case. Aggrieved, both the assessee as well as the revenue are in appeal before us on the following grounds :- 3 ITA Nos.1829-1830 &2121-2122/K/2013 AKZO Nobel India Ltd., AYs 2006-07 & 2007-08 “ Ground No. 1. For AY 2006-07 (Assessee appeal): 1. “That on the f…

M/S Akzo Nobel India Ltd. (Formerly Known As Ici India Ltd.), Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Circle - 10, Kolkata

ITA 1829/KOL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Niraj Kumar, CIT, DR
Section 10Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 50B

…total disallowance u/s 14A of the Act read with Rule 8D of the Rules worked out to Rs. 2,30,90,922/-. In appeal, the ld CIT(A) by placing reliance on the co-ordinate bench decision of this tribunal in the case of EIH Associated Hotels Ltd vs DCIT reported in 126 TTJ 246 (Kol Trib) held that only 1% of exempted income needs to be disallowed in the instant case. Aggrieved, both the assessee as well as the revenue are in appeal before us on the following grounds :- 3 ITA Nos.1829-1830 &2121-2122/K/2013 AKZO Nobel India Ltd., AYs 2006-07 & 2007-08 “ Ground No. 1. For AY 2006-07 (Assessee appeal): 1. “That on the f…

Jayneer Capital Private Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 6(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 694/MUM/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 Sept 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri D. Karunakara Rao & Shri Sanjay Gargi.T.A. No.694/M/2014 (Assessment Year:2008-2009) I.T.A. No.695/M/2014 (Assessment Year:2009-2010) फनाभ/ Jayneer Capital Private Limited, Acit, Circle 6(1), Continental Building, Mumbai. Vs. 135, Dr. A.B. Road, Worli, Mumbai – 400 018. स्थामी रेखा सं./ Pan : Aaacj1688G (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Niraj Seth प्रत्मथी की ओय से/ Respondent By : Shri Alok Johari, Cit

For Appellant: Shri Niraj SethFor Respondent: Shri Alok Johari, CIT
Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…rm- chair of the businessman or in the position of the board of directors and assume the role to decide how much is reasonable expenditure having regard to the circumstances of the case. Attention is also invited to the case of EIH Associated hotels vs. DCIT (126 TTJ 246) wherein the Kolkata Tribunal held that where the advances in the form of share application money to its subsidiary to facilitate its own financial interest, disallowance u/s 36(1)(iii) is not warranted. In this context, the Tribunal held as under:- We note that the advances given by the assessee company from time to time were against the issue o…

DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Eih Limited, Kolkata

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

ITA 348/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…auditor had also confirmed that no disallowance u/s 14A would arise for the assessee for the relevant assessment year. 11.1. The Learned CITA by placing reliance on the decision of this tribunal in the case of DCIT vs EIH Associated Hotels Limited reported in 126 TTJ 246 restricted the disallowance to 1% of dividend income to Rs. 95,479/-. Aggrieved, the assessee as well as the revenue both are in appeal before us. The assessee has raised the following ground:- “9. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act to the extent of 1% o…

Eih Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata

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

ITA 314/KOL/2011[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Respondent: Shri Vijay Shankar, CIT, DR
Section 143(3)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…auditor had also confirmed that no disallowance u/s 14A would arise for the assessee for the relevant assessment year. 11.1. The Learned CITA by placing reliance on the decision of this tribunal in the case of DCIT vs EIH Associated Hotels Limited reported in 126 TTJ 246 restricted the disallowance to 1% of dividend income to Rs. 95,479/-. Aggrieved, the assessee as well as the revenue both are in appeal before us. The assessee has raised the following ground:- “9. That on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in sustaining the disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act to the extent of 1% o…

JCIT(OSD), Circle - 8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 233/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e Assessment Year 2007-08, I restrict the disallowance to 1% of the exempt income of Rs.6,44,19,369/~ i.e. Rs 6,44,193/-. My order in the case of EIH Limited is based on the order of Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata, in the case of DCIT Vs. EIH Associated Hotels Limited 126 TTJ 246, which is another group company of the appellant. Hence, I direct the AO to reduce the disallowance u/s. 14A from 83,93,827/- to 6,44,193/-.” Aggrieved, now revenue as well as assessee came in appeal before Tribunal against restriction of disallowance at 1%. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case.…

Oberoi Hotels Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 8, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 230/KOL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e Assessment Year 2007-08, I restrict the disallowance to 1% of the exempt income of Rs.6,44,19,369/~ i.e. Rs 6,44,193/-. My order in the case of EIH Limited is based on the order of Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata, in the case of DCIT Vs. EIH Associated Hotels Limited 126 TTJ 246, which is another group company of the appellant. Hence, I direct the AO to reduce the disallowance u/s. 14A from 83,93,827/- to 6,44,193/-.” Aggrieved, now revenue as well as assessee came in appeal before Tribunal against restriction of disallowance at 1%. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case.…

DCIT, Circle -8, Kolkata vs. M/S. Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1041/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e Assessment Year 2007-08, I restrict the disallowance to 1% of the exempt income of Rs.6,44,19,369/~ i.e. Rs 6,44,193/-. My order in the case of EIH Limited is based on the order of Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata, in the case of DCIT Vs. EIH Associated Hotels Limited 126 TTJ 246, which is another group company of the appellant. Hence, I direct the AO to reduce the disallowance u/s. 14A from 83,93,827/- to 6,44,193/-.” Aggrieved, now revenue as well as assessee came in appeal before Tribunal against restriction of disallowance at 1%. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case.…

Oberoi Hotels Private Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle -8, Kolkata

In the result, assessee’s appeals in ITA Nos

ITA 1030/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 Oct 2015AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M. Balaganesh, Am]

For Appellant: Shri R. N. Bajoria, Sr. Advocate &For Respondent: Shri Debasish Roy, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e Assessment Year 2007-08, I restrict the disallowance to 1% of the exempt income of Rs.6,44,19,369/~ i.e. Rs 6,44,193/-. My order in the case of EIH Limited is based on the order of Hon’ble ITAT, Kolkata, in the case of DCIT Vs. EIH Associated Hotels Limited 126 TTJ 246, which is another group company of the appellant. Hence, I direct the AO to reduce the disallowance u/s. 14A from 83,93,827/- to 6,44,193/-.” Aggrieved, now revenue as well as assessee came in appeal before Tribunal against restriction of disallowance at 1%. 4. We have heard rival submissions and gone through facts and circumstances of the case.…

DCIT v. EIH Associated Hotels Limited (126 TTJ 246) — Cited in 11 Judgments | BharatTax