Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT

394 ITR 449Supreme Court of India2017#81 most cited

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.

683

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,470 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT · Section 14A disallowance · exempt income expenditure · dividend income disallowance · Assessing Officer satisfaction · Rule 8D application · condition precedent for disallowance · income not includible in total income · AO recording dissatisfaction · 394 ITR 449

Also reported as

81 Taxmann.com 11181 Taxmann 111

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 250Section 8DSection 142(1)Section 143(2)Section 154
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(1)section 14a(2)section 36(1)(viii)dividend distribution taxddtdomestic companyinfrastructure facilitysection 10(34)disallowance under section 14asection 36(1)(vii)put to usedisallowance u/s 14a

Judgments citing Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT

Mirc Electronics Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 36, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA 3320/Mum/2016 for assessment year 2011-12 is partly allowed

ITA 3320/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपीऱ सं./I.T.A. No. 3320/Mum/2016 (नििाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year : 2011-12)

For Appellant: Shri Rakesh MohanFor Respondent: Shri T.A Khan
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…orities below as to the incorrectness of the claim of the assessee’s claim and also this disallowance u/s 14A so upheld by us is in consonance with the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Godrej and Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449(SC). We order accordingly. 7. In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA 3320/Mum/2016 for assessment year 2011-12 is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 09 .11.2017 आदेश की घोषणा खुऱे न्यायाऱय में ददनांकः 09.11.2017 को की गई । (SAKTIJIT DEY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. No. 3320/Mum/2016 Mumbai, dated: 09.11.2017 copy to… 1…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 6021/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 35DSection 43BSection 92C

…assessee has incurred expenses, having proximate nexus with earning of exempt dividend income. According to the Ld. AR in the absence of such finding, as is held in CIT vs. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers: 326 ITR 1 (SC), Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT : 394 ITR 449 (SC) – affirming Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. CIT: 328 ITR 81 (Bom.), Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT: 347 ITR 272 (Del.), and Punjab & Haryana High Court in the case of CIT vs. Hero Cycles: 323 ITR 518, assessing officer does not have power to compute disallowance under section 14A as per provisions of Rule 8D, even for assessment years 2008-0…

M/S. Priapus Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 4923/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.S. Saini & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Anunav Kumar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Shailesh Kumar, Senior DR
Section 10Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘G’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.S. SAINI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.4923/Del./2015 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2012-13) M/s. Priapus Infrastructure Ltd., vs. ACIT, Circle 20 (1), M – 62 & 63, First Floor, New Delhi. Connaught Place, New Delhi – 110 001. (PAN : AAFCP2749B) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Anunav Kumar, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Shailesh Kumar, Senior DR Date of Hearing : 13.12.2018 Date of Order : 20.12.2018 O R D E R PER KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER : The appellant, M/s. Priapus Infrastructure Ltd.…

M/S. House of Pearl Fashions Limited, Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 1589/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 14A

…w. In view of this establish principle of law laid down by the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in a number of cases including HT Media (supra) and also the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Limited vs. DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC), we find that the enhancement of the disallowance made by the AO by invoking Section 14A read with Rule 8D of the Rules is bad and cannot be sustained. We, therefore, direct the AO to delete the same. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part. Order pronounced in the open court on 08.11.2017 (N.K. SAINI) JUDICIAL MEM…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Samtel Machines and Projects Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 4467/DEL/2016[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Nov 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Joginder Singh

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…om 118 (Del.). 5 ITA Nos.4467 & 4468/Del./2016 Samtel Machines & Projects Ltd. So far as, the decisions relied upon by Ld. CIT-DR like India Bulls Financial Services Ltd. vs DCIT (2016) 76 taxman.com 268 (Del.), Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449 (SC), Nahar Spinning Mills Ltd. vs CIT (2017) 82 taxman.com 154 (P & H), DCIT vs Viraj Profiles Ltd. 156 ITD 72 (Mum. Trib.), etc. are concerned, we note that these decision were taken to the peculiar facts and circumstances involved in those cases. The aforementioned cited cases are good laws but the facts in the present appeals are differe…

Kgk Diamonds (I) Ltd., Mumbai vs. DCIT, Jaipur

In the result, the disallowance under section 14A is hereby deleted

ITA 868/JPR/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur31 Oct 2017AY 2010-11
For Appellant: Shri S.R. Sharma (C.A.)&For Respondent: Shri Varinder Mehta (CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 868/JP/16 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2010-11 cuke M/s KGK Diamonds (I) Pvt. Ltd., The Dy. Commissioner of DE-4011-16, Tower D, 4th Floor, Vs. Income-tax, Central Bharat Diamond bourse, Bandra Kurla Circle-2, Jaipur. Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai- 400051, Maharashtra. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AADCK7579A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Responden…

M/S Khoday India Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeals of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1056/BANG/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Jason P Boaz

For Appellant: Shri S. Sukumar,AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri M.K. Biju, JCIT (DR) (ITAT)-3, Bengaluru
Section 14A

…unt of indirect expenditure is not warranted as the assessee has not incurred any expenditure in this respect. In support of his contention, he has relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. Vs. DCIT 394 ITR 449 as well as the decision of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Karntaka State Industrial and Infrastructure Development Corporation Limited 237 Taxman 240 and submitted that it was held that as per the provisions of Section 14A, the Assessing Officer shall determine the amount of expenditure incurred in relation to the exempt…

M/S. Dayanand Contractor, Rohtak vs. ITO, Rohtak

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2027/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, & Sh. Lalit Mohan, CAFor Respondent: Shri T. Vasanthan Sr. DR
Section 144A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, DELHI ‘SMC’ BENCH, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI B.P. JAIN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 2027/DEL/2016 [A.Y. 2012-13] Dayanand Contractor Vs. ITO C/o. N.C.Garg, CA Ward-1 Mal Godam Road Rohtak Rohtak PAN : AADFD4239K [Appellant] [Respondent] Date of Hearing : 10.10.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 16.10.2017 Assessee by : Shri Gautam Jain, & Sh. Lalit Mohan, CA Revenue by : Shri T. Vasanthan Sr. DR ORDER This appeal of the assessee arises from the order of the ld. CIT(A)-Faridabad vide order dated 23.02.2016 for assessment year 2012-13. 2. The assessee has raised following additional…

Central Bank of India, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 3649/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Shri Pratap Singh
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “सी”, म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE S/SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM), AND RAJESH KUMAR,(AM) I.T.A. No.1525 and 3649/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2008-09 and 2009-10) Central Bank of India, Asstt. Commissioner of Income 4th floor, CAD(B/S), Tax –Circle 2(1), बनाम/ Chaner Mukhi, Nariman Point, Room No.561, 5h floor, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent PAN:AAACC2498P I.T.A. No.1561 and 3438/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2008-09 and 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner of Income Ce…

DCIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Central Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 3438/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Shri Pratap Singh
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “सी”, म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE S/SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM), AND RAJESH KUMAR,(AM) I.T.A. No.1525 and 3649/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2008-09 and 2009-10) Central Bank of India, Asstt. Commissioner of Income 4th floor, CAD(B/S), Tax –Circle 2(1), बनाम/ Chaner Mukhi, Nariman Point, Room No.561, 5h floor, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent PAN:AAACC2498P I.T.A. No.1561 and 3438/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2008-09 and 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner of Income Ce…

DCIT 2(1), Mumbai vs. Central Bank of India, Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1561/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Shri Pratap Singh
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “सी”, म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE S/SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM), AND RAJESH KUMAR,(AM) I.T.A. No.1525 and 3649/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2008-09 and 2009-10) Central Bank of India, Asstt. Commissioner of Income 4th floor, CAD(B/S), Tax –Circle 2(1), बनाम/ Chaner Mukhi, Nariman Point, Room No.561, 5h floor, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent PAN:AAACC2498P I.T.A. No.1561 and 3438/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2008-09 and 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner of Income Ce…

Central Bank of India, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 2(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed and that of revenue are dismissed

ITA 1525/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai03 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble S/Shri Joginder Singh (Jm) & Rajesh Kumar,(Am)

For Appellant: Shri F V IraniFor Respondent: Shri Pratap Singh
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, म ुंबई न्यायपीठ “सी”, म ुंबई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BENCH “C” MUMBAI BEFORE HON’BLE S/SHRI JOGINDER SINGH (JM), AND RAJESH KUMAR,(AM) I.T.A. No.1525 and 3649/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years :2008-09 and 2009-10) Central Bank of India, Asstt. Commissioner of Income 4th floor, CAD(B/S), Tax –Circle 2(1), बनाम/ Chaner Mukhi, Nariman Point, Room No.561, 5h floor, Vs. Mumbai-400021 Aayakar Bhavan, M K Road, Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent PAN:AAACC2498P I.T.A. No.1561 and 3438/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Years : 2008-09 and 2009-10) Dy. Commissioner of Income Ce…

Asst CIT Cen Cir 2(4), Mumbai vs. Twinkle Enviro Tech P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5052/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2011-12 Acit-2(4) Twinkle Enviro Tech P. Room No. 802, 8Th Ltd. 317/318 Parvatiindl. Vs. Floor, Old Cgo Estate, Sunmill Building, Annex Compound, Lower M.K. Road Parel(W) Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013 Pan No. Aaact4038N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Shri Ram Tiwari, Dr Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing : 12/07/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 27/09/2017

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Ram Tiwari, DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “E” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2011-12 ACIT-2(4) Twinkle Enviro Tech P. Room No. 802, 8th Ltd. 317/318 ParvatiIndl. Vs. floor, Old CGO Estate, Sunmill Building, Annex Compound, Lower M.K. Road Parel(W) Mumbai-400020. Mumbai-400013 PAN No. AAACT4038N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Shri Ram Tiwari, DR Assessee by : None Date of Hearing : 12/07/2017 Date of pronouncement: 27/09/2017 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessmen…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Feedback Infra Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5980/DEL/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Sept 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.P. Jain & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Gaurav Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Arun Kumar Yadav, Senior DR
Section 114Section 14A

…which does not form part 7 ITA No5980/Del./2015 of the total income under the Act. He is required to do so on the basis of a reasonable and acceptable method of apportionment.” 10. Hon’ble Apex Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing 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 8D of the Rules m…

Pn Nj Industries P.Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. ACIT Cir 10(3)(Old) DCIT Cir 15(2)(2) (New), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2324/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey () & Shri N.K. Pradhan () Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Pn Nj Industries Pvt. Acit, Circle-10(3) (Old) Ltd. Dcit, Circle-15(2)(2) Vs. Plot No. A-470, Ttc (New) Industries Area, Midc, 4Th Floor, Mahape, P.O. Ghansoi, Aayakarbhavan, M.K. Navi Mumbai-400701 Road, Mumbai-400020 Pan No. Aaccs1519B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Mr. Govind Javeri, Ar Revenue By: Mr. Saurabh Kumar Rai, Dr Date Of Hearing : 15/06/2017 Date Of Pronouncement: 12/09/2017

For Appellant: Mr. Govind Javeri, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Saurabh Kumar Rai, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH “I” MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SAKTIJIT DEY (JUDICIAL MEMBER) AND SHRI N.K. PRADHAN (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s PN NJ Industries Pvt. ACIT, Circle-10(3) (Old) Ltd. DCIT, Circle-15(2)(2) Vs. Plot No. A-470, TTC (New) Industries Area, MIDC, 4th floor, Mahape, P.O. Ghansoi, AayakarBhavan, M.K. Navi Mumbai-400701 Road, Mumbai-400020 PAN No. AACCS1519B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Mr. Govind Javeri, AR Revenue by: Mr. Saurabh Kumar Rai, DR Date of Hearing : 15/06/2017 Date of pronouncement: 12/09/2017 ORDER PER N.K. PRADHAN, AM This is an…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6840/DEL/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Sept 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: : Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri L.P. Sahu

Section 14A

…In the Income-Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench ‘C’, New Delhi Before : Shri H.S. Sidhu, Judicial Member And Shri L.P. Sahu, Accountant Member ITA No. 6840/Del./2014 Assessment Year: 2011-12 D.C.I.T., Circle 2(1), vs. M/s. Indiabulls Financial Services Ltd., New Delhi. M-62 & 63, First Floor, Connaught Place, New Delhi. PAN – AAACI8670Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by Shri Navin Chandra, CIT/DR Respondent by Sh. Gautam Jain & Piyush Kamal, Adv. Date of Hearing 06.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement 08.09.2017 ORDER Per L.P. Sahu, A.M.: This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order dated 30.09.20…

H.T. Media Limited vs. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-IV

ITA/549/2015HC Delhi23 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 10Section 142Section 143Section 143(2)Section 14ASection 260

…zed only for the purpose of business and not for making investment and therefore, no proportionate disallowance was required to be made. Mr. Vohra placed reliance on the decision of the Supreme Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. DCIT [2017] 394 ITR 449 (SC) which held that in case no disallowance was made in earlier years on the ground that no borrowed funds had been utilized for the purpose of earning tax free income, no disallowance can be made in later year also, following the principle of consistency. It was further held that, irrespective of the fact that Rule 8D is retrospective or n…

Sundaram Industries Private Limited, Madurai vs. DCIT, Madurai

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

ITA 136/CHNY/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 Aug 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri A. Mohan Alankamonyआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.136/Mds/2017 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2007-08 M/S Sundaram Industries Pvt. Ltd., The Deputy Commissioner Of Corporate Office, V. Income Tax, 211, South Veli Street, Corporate Circle 2, Madurai – 625 001. Madurai – 625 002. Pan : Aabcs 5320 H (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.A. Balasubramanyan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR.V. Sreenivasan, JCIT
Section 14A

…idend income. Since no expenditure was incurred, according to the Ld. counsel, there cannot be any disallowance even on estimate basis. The Ld.counsel placed his reliance on the judgment of Apex Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. v. DCIT (2017) 394 ITR 449. The Ld.counsel further submitted that the assessee is not maintaining any books of account for the purpose of investment made in subsidiary companies. Referring to the judgment of Apex Court in Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd. (supra), the Ld.counsel submitted that the Assessing Officer has to satisfy himself with regard to accounts of th…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-2 vs. Chl, Limited

ITA/693/2017HC Delhi21 Aug 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 14A

…* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 32&39 + ITA No. 638/2017 PR.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Appellant Through: Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel versus CHL LIMITED Through: None Respondent + ITA No. 693/2017 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2 Appellant Through: Mr Zoheb Hossain, Senior Standing Counsel versus CHL LIMITED Through: None CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH % ORDER 21.08.2017 Respondent 1. These appeals are directed by the Revenue against the common order dated 17'*' February 2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITA Nos. 638/2017 & 693/2017 Page 1 of3 Digi…

Rel Utility Engimeers Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 10(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7177/MUM/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jul 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S. Crest Logistics & Addl. Cit-10(1), Engineers Private Limited, [New Jurisdiction Addl. Cit (Erstwhile Rel Utility 14(3)(1)] Engineers Ltd. Formerly Known Aayakar Bhavan, As Rel Utility Engineers Ltd. M.K. Road, Vs. Formerly Known As Mumbai - 400020 Sonata Investments Ltd.), Devidas Lane, Near Mtnl, Off Svp Road, Borivali (W) – 400 103 Pan: Aaccr 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner Of Income M/S. Crest Logistic & Tax-14(1)(2), Engineering Ltd., Room No.470, 4Th Floor, (Formerly Known As Sonata Aayakar Bhavan, Investments Ltd.) Maharshi Karve Road, Vs. 307, Charted House, Mumbai - 400020 297/299, Dr. Cawasji Hormosji Street, New Marine Lines, Mumbai – 400 002 Pan: Aaccr 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra Sanghvi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri B. Pruseth, D.R

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “D”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAJESH KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2009-10 M/s. Crest Logistics and Addl. CIT-10(1), Engineers Private Limited, [New Jurisdiction Addl. CIT (Erstwhile REL Utility 14(3)(1)] Engineers Ltd. Formerly known Aayakar Bhavan, as REL Utility Engineers Ltd. M.K. Road, Vs. Formerly known as Mumbai - 400020 Sonata Investments Ltd.), Devidas Lane, Near MTNL, Off SVP Road, Borivali (W) – 400 103 PAN: AACCR 7266A (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2009-10 Dy. Commissioner of Income M/s. Crest L…