What is Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT authority for?

Expenditure can only be disallowed under Section 14A if the income is exempt and not part of the total income. The Assessing Officer must first record dissatisfaction with the assessee's accounts or computation before proceeding to make a disallowance under Section 14A or applying Rule 8D.

How many judgments cite Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT?

683 judgments on BharatTax cite Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT (394 ITR 449), spanning 2016 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 250, Section 8D, Section 142(1).

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT (394 ITR 449)

Income Tax Officer (Exemptions), Ward, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 68/JPR/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…and circumstances of the case are identical. Further, it is a well settled legal proposition, as has been laid down by the Courts from time to time and which has been reiterated by theHon’ble Supreme Court in case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. (394 ITR 449) that: “While it is true that the principle of res judicata would not apply to assessment proceedings under the Act, the need for consistency and certainty and existence of strong and compelling reasons for a departure from a settled position has to be spelt out which conspicuously is absent in the present case. In this regard we may remind ourse…

Income Tax Officer (Exemption), Ward, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 67/JPR/2022[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…and circumstances of the case are identical. Further, it is a well settled legal proposition, as has been laid down by the Courts from time to time and which has been reiterated by theHon’ble Supreme Court in case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. (394 ITR 449) that: “While it is true that the principle of res judicata would not apply to assessment proceedings under the Act, the need for consistency and certainty and existence of strong and compelling reasons for a departure from a settled position has to be spelt out which conspicuously is absent in the present case. In this regard we may remind ourse…

Income Tax Officer, Jaipur vs. Rajasthan Cricket Association, Jaipur

In the result, appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 66/JPR/2022[2005]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur21 Jun 2022

Bench: The Hon’Ble Tribunal In The Interest Of Justice.

For Appellant: Shri Shyam Lal Agarwal, CAFor Respondent: Ms Manisha Chandra, CIT fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@

Section 11Section 12ASection 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 2(15)

…and circumstances of the case are identical. Further, it is a well settled legal proposition, as has been laid down by the Courts from time to time and which has been reiterated by theHon’ble Supreme Court in case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. (394 ITR 449) that: “While it is true that the principle of res judicata would not apply to assessment proceedings under the Act, the need for consistency and certainty and existence of strong and compelling reasons for a departure from a settled position has to be spelt out which conspicuously is absent in the present case. In this regard we may remind ourse…

Suyash Auto Press Components and Assemblys Pvt. Ltd, Pune vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle -6, Pune

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

ITA 564/PUN/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Or During The Course Of Hearing Of The Case.

For Appellant: Shri Rohit TapadiaFor Respondent: Shri M.G. Jasanani

Section 14A

…ds at Rs.342,85,75,403/- as against the total amount of Investments standing at Rs.3.54 crore. 5. This issue is now no more res integra in view of the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. vs. DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC), upholding the view of the lower authorities that when interest free funds in the form of share capital and reserves etc. are more than the amount of investment, then no disallowance of interest can be made u/s 14A. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT vs. HDFC Bank Ltd. (2014) 366 ITR 515 (Bom). The Hon'ble Ka…

M/S. Wipro Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-7(1)(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 2556/BANG/2019[2015-16]Status: HeardITAT Bangalore23 May 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri B.R. Baskaranit(Tp)A No.2556/Bang/2019 Assessment Year : 2015-16

For Appellant: Shri S. Ganesh, Sr. ARFor Respondent: Shri T. Roumuan Paite, D.R

Section 143(3)

…isallowed by the company. Accordingly, it was submitted that the A.O was not justified in applying rule 8D of IT Rules. The Ld. A.R. also placed reliance on the decision rendered by Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godrej &Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. 394 ITR 449. 22.4 We have noticed that this issue has been restored by ITAT in assessment year 2008-09 to the file of the A.O. A perusal of the assessment order passed by A.O. would show that the A.O. has observed that he was not satisfied with the working furnished by the assessee. However, the A.O. has not examined the basis of the allocation and apportion…

Asstt. Comm. of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji vs. Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Dona Paula

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 381/PAN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 380/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Cidade De Goa, Vainguinim Beach, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. Pan : Aaaci9107R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Panaji-Goa, ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 381/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji-Goa, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, AR &For Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 40Section 41(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ, पणजी म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI (Through virtual Court- at Raipur) BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAMLAPPA D BATTULL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 380/PAN/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Cidade De Goa, Vainguinim Beach, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. PAN : AAACI9107R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Panaji-Goa, ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 381/PAN/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner of In…

Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd., Dona Paula vs. Joint Comm. of Income Tax, Range - 1, Panaji

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 380/PAN/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji13 May 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 380/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Cidade De Goa, Vainguinim Beach, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. Pan : Aaaci9107R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Joint Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range-1, Panaji-Goa, ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No. 381/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle, Panaji-Goa, .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S.

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, AR &For Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 28Section 40Section 41(1)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण "यायपीठ, पणजी म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, PANAJI (Through virtual Court- at Raipur) BEFORE SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI JAMLAPPA D BATTULL, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 380/PAN/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 Infrastructure Logistics Pvt. Ltd. Cidade De Goa, Vainguinim Beach, Dona Paula, Goa-403 004. PAN : AAACI9107R .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/s. The Joint Commissioner of Income Tax, Range-1, Panaji-Goa, ……""यथ" / Respondent आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No. 381/PAN/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10 The Assistant Commissioner of In…

DCIT, C-4, Jaipur vs. M/S. Jlc Electromet Pvt. Ltd., Jaipur

In the result, the appeal of the Department is dismissed

ITA 166/JPR/2020[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur12 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

For Appellant: Shri Mahendra GargieyaFor Respondent: Shri A.S. Nehra, Addl. CIT

Section 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 195Section 40Section 9(1)(vii)

…ence of any material change in the facts & circumstances, the Rule of Consistency require that the view already taken must be followed in later years as well. Kindly refer: 18.1 Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner Income-Tax & ANR. [394 ITR 449 (SC)/ [2017] 81 taxmann.com 111 (SC)] "38. In the present case, we do not find any mention of the reasons which had prevailed upon the Assessing Officer, while dealing with the Assessment Year 2002-2003, to hold that the claims of the Assessee that no expenditure was incurred to earn the dividend income cannot be accepted and why the orders of th…

ACIT Circle-7(1), New Delhi vs. Dlf Home Developers Ltd, New Delhi

ITA 8041/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Apr 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Dr. B.R.R. Kumar

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Yagya Saini Kakkar, CIT DR

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 14A(3)

…penditure has been made by the assessee company during the year under assessment to earn the interest free income rather proceeded mechanically by extracting the bare language of Rule 8D. Hon'ble Apex Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacture Company Ltd vs. DCIT - 394 ITR 449 (SC) thrashed the issue in controversy as to invoking of the provisions contained under Rule 8D of the Rules by observing as under "37. We do not see how in the aforesaid fact situation a different view could have been taken for the Assessment Year 2002-2003. Sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 14A of the Act read with Rule BD of the Rules merely…

M/S Ahiliabai Sardessai, Panaji vs. ACIT, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 379/PAN/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 378 & 379/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S. Ahilibai Sardessai 301, Lotus Court, M.G. Road, St. Inez Junction, Panaji-Goa-403 001 Pan : Aagfa9044G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Panaji-Goa. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri D.E. Robinson, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :22.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri D.E. Robinson, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…im of the assessee in respect of expenses incurred for earning of exempt income was not to be accepted, is no more res-integra and had been settled by the Hon'ble’ Supreme Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs. PCIT and Anr. (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC). The Hon'ble Apex Court in its aforesaid decision, had observed, that it is obligatory on the part of the A.O to record his satisfaction that having regard to the accounts of the assessee, as placed before him, it was not possible to generate the reasonable satisfaction with regard to the correctness of the claim of the assessee. It was obse…

M/S Ahiliabai Sardessai, Panaji vs. ACIT, Circle - 1(1), Panaji

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 378/PAN/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Panaji31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Jamlappa D Battullआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos. 378 & 379/Pan/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2010-11 & 2012-13 M/S. Ahilibai Sardessai 301, Lotus Court, M.G. Road, St. Inez Junction, Panaji-Goa-403 001 Pan : Aagfa9044G .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Circle-1(1), Panaji-Goa. ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By : Shri D.E. Robinson, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख / Date Of Hearing :22.02.2022 घोषणा क" तार"ख / Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022

For Appellant: Shri D.E. Robinson, ARFor Respondent: Shri Sourabh Nayak, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…im of the assessee in respect of expenses incurred for earning of exempt income was not to be accepted, is no more res-integra and had been settled by the Hon'ble’ Supreme Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. Vs. PCIT and Anr. (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC). The Hon'ble Apex Court in its aforesaid decision, had observed, that it is obligatory on the part of the A.O to record his satisfaction that having regard to the accounts of the assessee, as placed before him, it was not possible to generate the reasonable satisfaction with regard to the correctness of the claim of the assessee. It was obse…