DCIT v. S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd.

89 ITD 44Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2004#4082 most cited

What is DCIT v. S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd. authority for?

All expenses connected with exempt income must be disallowed, irrespective of their nature (direct, indirect, fixed, variable, managerial, or financial).

29

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2024.

Also referred to as

S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd. · 89 ITD 44 · ITAT · Section 14A · exempt income · disallowance of expenses · connected with exempt income · managerial expenses · financial expenses

Sections most often in play

Section 1961Section 10(34) of the Income Tax ActSection 10(38) of the Income Tax ActSection 143(1) of the Income Tax ActSection 143(3) of the Income Tax ActSection 144 of the Income Tax ActSection 14ASection 14A of the Income Tax Act

Issues it is cited on

section 80lasection 86section 80ib(4)section 80lsection 80ia(4)(i)section 167bsection 80msection 167clarificatory amendmentsection 80ia(4)period of holdinginfrastructure facility

Judgments citing DCIT v. S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd.

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. DCIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

ITA 4105/MUM/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…he disallowance under section 14 A of ₹ 3,814,037,203/–. 25) While making such disallowance the learned assessing officer further considered the decisions of coordinate bench in Deputy Commissioner of income tax versus SG investment and industries Ltd [(2004) 89 ITD 44 (KOL)], honourable Supreme Court in case of CIT versus United Gen trust private limited [(200 ITR 488)], Distributors(Baroda) private limited versus Union of India [155 ITR 120] and the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Magan Lal Chhaganlal private limited (236 ITR 456). 26) Assessee aggrieved with the order of the…

DCIT 2(2), MUMBAI vs. STATE BANK OF INDIA, MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2006 – 07 and 2007 – 08 is partly allowed

ITA 4952/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm A.Y.2006-07 [ By Assessee] &

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…he disallowance under section 14 A of ₹ 3,814,037,203/–. 25) While making such disallowance the learned assessing officer further considered the decisions of coordinate bench in Deputy Commissioner of income tax versus SG investment and industries Ltd [(2004) 89 ITD 44 (KOL)], honourable Supreme Court in case of CIT versus United Gen trust private limited [(200 ITR 488)], Distributors(Baroda) private limited versus Union of India [155 ITR 120] and the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Magan Lal Chhaganlal private limited (236 ITR 456). 26) Assessee aggrieved with the order of the…

STATE BANK OF INDIA,MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CIR 2(2), MUMBAI

In the result appeal filed by the assessee for assessment

ITA 3868/MUM/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Oct 2024AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi, Am & Ms Kavitha Rajagopal , Jm

Section 14Section 143Section 36Section 41

…isallowance under section 14 A of ₹ 3,814,037,203/–. 25) While making such disallowance the learned assessing officer further considered the decisions of coordinate bench in Deputy Commissioner of income tax versus SG investment and industries Ltd [(2004) 89 ITD 44 (KOL)], honourable Supreme Court in case of CIT versus United Gen trust private limited [(200 ITR 488)], Distributors(Baroda) private limited versus Union of India [155 ITR 120] and the decision of the honourable Bombay High Court in case of CIT versus Magan Lal Chhaganlal private limited (236 ITR 456). 26) Assessee aggrieved with the order…

ASSOCIATED TECHNO PLASTIC P. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 1890/DEL/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2024AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Brajesh Kumar Singh[Assessment Year : 2008-09] Associated Techno Plastic P.Ltd., Vs Dcit, Elegence Level-2, Mathura Road, Circle-2(1), Jasola, New Delhi-110025. New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca2525K Appellant Respondent Appellant By None Respondent By Shri Kanv Bali, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing 08.05.2024 Date Of Pronouncement 22.05.2024

Section 143(1)Section 144Section 14ASection 234BSection 40Section 68

…ust Ltd. (supra) and many other following decisions of the Coordinate Benches of the Hon'ble ITAT viz. (a) Southern Petro Chemicals Industries (2005), 93 TTJ 161 (b) Harish Krishnakanta Bhatt (2004), 91 ITD 311 (c) S.G. Investments and Industries Ltd. (2004), 89 ITD 44 (d) Everplus Securities & Finances Ltd. (2006), 285 ITR (AT) 112, It is held that all expenses connected with the exempt income have to be necessarily disallowed regardless of whether they are direct or indirect, fixed or variable, and managerial or financial in accordance with law. In this connection, the provisions of sub-section (2) and (3) of S…

AU SMALL FINANCE BANK LIMITED,JAIPUR vs. PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, JAIPUR-1

In the result both the appeals filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 203/JPR/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur28 Jul 2023AY 2017-18

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member), SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI (Accountant Member)

For Appellant: Shri Sanjay Jhanwar, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri James Kurian, CIT
Section 115JSection 263Section 35ASection 36(1)(viia)

…14A is called for. The decisions cited by the AO in his assessment order to this effect are as under:- (i) Sothern Petro Chemicals Industries (2005) 93, TTJ 161 (ii) Harish Krishnakanta Bhatt (2004) 91 ITD 311 (iii) S.G. Investments and Industries Ltd. (2004) 89 ITD 44 (iv) Everplus Securities & Finance Ltd. (2006) 285 ITR (AT) 112 The AO thus held that all expenses connected with the exempt income have to be necessarily disallowed regardless of whether they are direct or indirect, fixed or variable and managerial or financial in accordance with law. The AO thus observed that invocation of Section 14A is automati…

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2486/MUM/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

…inted out that the facts of following decisions are distinguishable from the facts of the appellant's case: • ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. 108 ITD 457 • Everplus Securities & Finance Ltd. v. DCIT 101 ITD 151 • DCIT v. SG Investments & industries Ltd. 89 ITD 44 17. We have considered rival contentions and found that a clear finding has been given by the CIT(A) to the effect that amount was receivable on account of hire charges on machinery from JV or on account of assessee’s share in the JV firm. The question of disallowance of interest u/s.14A arises only when the funds have been given to JV/sister conce…

DCIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2485/MUM/2017[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Jul 2023AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Aby T. Varkey, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon’Ble

Section 14ASection 154Section 199(2)Section 80I

…inted out that the facts of following decisions are distinguishable from the facts of the appellant's case: • ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. 108 ITD 457 • Everplus Securities & Finance Ltd. v. DCIT 101 ITD 151 • DCIT v. SG Investments & industries Ltd. 89 ITD 44 17. We have considered rival contentions and found that a clear finding has been given by the CIT(A) to the effect that amount was receivable on account of hire charges on machinery from JV or on account of assessee’s share in the JV firm. The question of disallowance of interest u/s.14A arises only when the funds have been given to JV/sister conce…

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2758/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14ASection 199(2)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

…llant's case:  ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. 108 ITD 457  Everplus Securities & Finance Ltd. v. DCIT 101 ITD 151 ITA.No. 2933/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) C.O. No. 259 & 260/MUM/2018 M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd.,  DCIT v. SG Investments & industries Ltd. 89 ITD 44 We have considered rival contentions and found that a clear finding has been given by the CIT(A) to the effect that amount was receivable on account of hire charges on machinery from JV or on account of assessee’s share in the JV firm. The question of disallowance of interest u/s.14A arises only when the funds have been given to JV/sister concern i…

ACIT CC 3(4) CEN RG 3, MUMBAI vs. PATEL ENGINEERING LTD, MUMBAI

In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2757/MUM/2017[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Oct 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy, Hon'Ble & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Hon'Ble

Section 14ASection 199(2)Section 801A(4)Section 80I

…llant's case:  ACIT v. Citicorp Finance (India) Ltd. 108 ITD 457  Everplus Securities & Finance Ltd. v. DCIT 101 ITD 151 ITA.No. 2933/MUM/2019 (A.Y. 2014-15) C.O. No. 259 & 260/MUM/2018 M/s. Patel Engineering Ltd.,  DCIT v. SG Investments & industries Ltd. 89 ITD 44 We have considered rival contentions and found that a clear finding has been given by the CIT(A) to the effect that amount was receivable on account of hire charges on machinery from JV or on account of assessee’s share in the JV firm. The question of disallowance of interest u/s.14A arises only when the funds have been given to JV/sister concern i…

M/S KARNATAKA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 972/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. & Assessment Appellant Respondent Years 971/Bang/2018 M/s. Karnataka State ACIT, 2009-10 Beverages Corporation Ltd., Circle - 4(1)(1), 4th Floor, TTMC Building Bengaluru. ‘A’ Block, BMTC, Shantinagar, Bengaluru. PAN : ACAPR 1985 P 972/Bang/2018 -do- -do- 2010-11 1925/Bang/2017 -do- DCIT, 2010-11 Circle - 4(1)(1), Bengaluru. Assessee by : Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing…

M/S KARNATAKA STATE BEVERAGES CORPORATION LIMITED ,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 971/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. & Assessment Appellant Respondent Years 971/Bang/2018 M/s. Karnataka State ACIT, 2009-10 Beverages Corporation Ltd., Circle - 4(1)(1), 4th Floor, TTMC Building Bengaluru. ‘A’ Block, BMTC, Shantinagar, Bengaluru. PAN : ACAPR 1985 P 972/Bang/2018 -do- -do- 2010-11 1925/Bang/2017 -do- DCIT, 2010-11 Circle - 4(1)(1), Bengaluru. Assessee by : Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing…

M/S. KARNATAKA STATE BEVEREGES CORPORATION LTD,BANGALORE vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-4(1)(1), BANGALORE

In the result, appeal by the assessee is treated as partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1925/BANG/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore29 Jul 2021AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri N. V. Vasudevan & Shri Chandra Poojari

For Appellant: Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N. V. VASUDEVAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos. & Assessment Appellant Respondent Years 971/Bang/2018 M/s. Karnataka State ACIT, 2009-10 Beverages Corporation Ltd., Circle - 4(1)(1), 4th Floor, TTMC Building Bengaluru. ‘A’ Block, BMTC, Shantinagar, Bengaluru. PAN : AACCK 1421 A 972/Bang/2018 -do- -do- 2010-11 1925/Bang/2017 -do- DCIT, 2010-11 Circle - 4(1)(1), Bengaluru. Assessee by : Shri. S. V. Ravishankar, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Priyadarshi Mishra, Addl. CIT (DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru Date of hearing…

M/S ANUSHREYA INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-3(2), KOLKATA

In the result, the appeal of assessee is allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 767/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata30 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Am & Hon’Ble Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm Assessment Year: 2014-15

Section 14Section 14A

…1 A.Y 2014-15 Anushreya Investments P.Ltd. आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ –“C” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C” BENCH: KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, AM and Hon’ble Shri A. T. Varkey, JM Assessment Year: 2014-15 Anushreya Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward 3(2), PAN: AACCA3658B Kolkata Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing (Virtual) 24-09.2020 Date of Pronouncement 30 .09.2020 For the Appellant Shri Manish Tiwari, FCA, Ld.AR For the Respondent Shri Jayanta Khanra, JCIT, Ld. Sr.DR ORDER Shri A. T. Varkey, JM This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the…

M/S ANUSHREYA INVESTMENTS PVT. LTD.,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-3(1), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

Appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes in above terms

ITA 1126/KOL/2017[A.Y- 2012-13,]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata13 Feb 2019

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2012-13 M/S Anushreya Investments Income Tax Officer, बनाम / Pvt. Ltd., 18,British India Ward-3(1), P-7, V/S. Street, 1St Floor, Room Chowringhee Square, No105, Kolkaa-69 Kolkta-69 [Pan No.Aaccca 3658 B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah,A Fca अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.J Singh, Jcit-Sr-Dr ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 29-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 13-02-2019 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per S.S.Godara:- This Assessee’S Appeal For Assessment Year 2012-13 Arises Against The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata’S Order Dated 15.03.2017 Passed In Case No.213/Cit(A)-9/Wd.3(1)/2016-17/Kol Involving Proceedings 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961; In Short ‘The Act’. Heard Both The Parties. Case File(S) Perused. 2. The Assessee’S Sole Substantive Ground Seeks To Reverse Both The Lower Authorities Action Making Sec. 14 R.W.S. Rule 8D Disallowance Of ₹49,24,682/- Comprising Of Demat Charges, Proportionate Interest & Administrative Expenditure Of ₹1,43,005/-, ₹43,53,951/- & ₹4,27,726/-; Respectively. Learned Counsel’S First Argument During The Course Of Hearing Is That Both The Lower Authorities Have Erred In

Section 14Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL KOLKATA BENCH “A” KOLKATA Before Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy, Accountant Member and Shri S.S.Godara, Judicial Member Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s Anushreya Investments Income Tax Officer, बनाम / Pvt. Ltd., 18,British India Ward-3(1), P-7, V/s. Street, 1st Floor, Room Chowringhee Square, No105, Kolkaa-69 Kolkta-69 [PAN No.AACCCA 3658 B] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ" /Respondent Shri Miraj D Shah,a FCA अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri C.J Singh, JCIT-SR-DR ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 29-01-2019 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date of Hearing 13-02-2019 घ…

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., NEW DELHI

In the result, Assessee’s appeal vide ITA No

ITA 6151/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Gagan Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. K.J. Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…he Tribunal held that dividend being exempt u/s 10(34), interest on capital borrowed for acquisition of relevant share yielding such dividend cannot be allowed deduction by operation of section 14A of the Act. In DCIT Vs. S.G. Investment and Inds. Ltd. (2004) 89 ITD 44 (Cal.), the Tribunal said that in view Page 25 of 39 Fit for Publication ITA Nos.-5705 & 6151/Del/2014. (AM) (JM) Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd. of section 14|A of the Act, pro-rata expenses on account of interest relatable to investment in share for earning exempt income from dividend are to be disallowed against taxable income and…

M/S. HOUSING & URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD. (HUDCO),NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, Assessee’s appeal vide ITA No

ITA 5705/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri Anadee Nath Misshra

For Appellant: Sh. Gagan Kumar, Adv. &For Respondent: Sh. K.J. Singh, CIT (DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…he Tribunal held that dividend being exempt u/s 10(34), interest on capital borrowed for acquisition of relevant share yielding such dividend cannot be allowed deduction by operation of section 14A of the Act. In DCIT Vs. S.G. Investment and Inds. Ltd. (2004) 89 ITD 44 (Cal.), the Tribunal said that in view Page 25 of 39 Fit for Publication ITA Nos.-5705 & 6151/Del/2014. (AM) (JM) Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd. of section 14|A of the Act, pro-rata expenses on account of interest relatable to investment in share for earning exempt income from dividend are to be disallowed against taxable income and…

MARUTI TRADERS & INVESTORS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT, CIRCLE - 31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 637/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 846/Kol/2017 I.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri D.S. Damle, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…those shares and maintaining those shares would have to be apportioned between taxable and exempt income. The ld AR placed reliance on the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of DCIT vs S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd reported in 89 ITD 44 (Kol) dated 29.5.2003 wherein the ld AO determined the sum of Rs 19,14,940/- out of total interest paid of Rs 3,69,36,637/- as interest relatable to earning of exempted dividend by working out the percentage of dividend vis a vis total turnover during the year. The dividend earned in that case was Rs 41,38,924/- which worked out to 5.27% of total e…

MARUTI TRADERS & INVESTORS,KOLKATA vs. ACIT CIRCLE 31, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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

ITA 846/KOL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata28 Nov 2018AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S.Godara, Jm & Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am] I.T.A No. 846/Kol/2017 I.T.A. No. 637/Kol/2018 Assessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri D.S. Damle, ARFor Respondent: Shri P.K. Srihari, CIT DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…those shares and maintaining those shares would have to be apportioned between taxable and exempt income. The ld AR placed reliance on the decision of the co-ordinate bench of this tribunal in the case of DCIT vs S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd reported in 89 ITD 44 (Kol) dated 29.5.2003 wherein the ld AO determined the sum of Rs 19,14,940/- out of total interest paid of Rs 3,69,36,637/- as interest relatable to earning of exempted dividend by working out the percentage of dividend vis a vis total turnover during the year. The dividend earned in that case was Rs 41,38,924/- which worked out to 5.27% of total e…

BISNAUTH INVESTMENTS LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 681/KOL/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 14A

…penses of Rs.3,500/- were incurred. In AO’s opinion the administrative expenses incurred by the appellant were attributable to earning dividend income, as held by the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Dy.CITVs S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd (89 ITD 44). Accordingly the AO computed the amount disallowable as per Rule 8D(2) at Rs.1,51,28,768/- but since the interest & expenses debited in the P&L A/c and claimed in the return were Rs.1,26,51,029/-, the AO restricted the disallowance u/s 14A to Rs.1,26,51,029/-. Aggrieved by the AO’s order, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CI…

BISNAUTH INVESTMENTS LTD,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE-6, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed

ITA 680/KOL/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata05 Sept 2018AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 14A

…penses of Rs.3,500/- were incurred. In AO’s opinion the administrative expenses incurred by the appellant were attributable to earning dividend income, as held by the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Dy.CITVs S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd (89 ITD 44). Accordingly the AO computed the amount disallowable as per Rule 8D(2) at Rs.1,51,28,768/- but since the interest & expenses debited in the P&L A/c and claimed in the return were Rs.1,26,51,029/-, the AO restricted the disallowance u/s 14A to Rs.1,26,51,029/-. Aggrieved by the AO’s order, the assessee preferred appeal before the CIT(A). The Ld. CI…

Showing 1–20 of 29 · Page 1 of 2

DCIT v. S.G. Investments & Industries Ltd. (89 ITD 44) — Cited in 29 Judgments | BharatTax