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 367,154 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

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune vs. Persistent Systems Limited, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 595/PUN/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.590, 595 & 1478/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Assistant V Persistent Systems Limited, Commissioner Of Income S 402, Bhageerath, Senapati Tax,Pune. Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aabcp1209Q Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri R.D.Onkar – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 31.01.2024 & 06.05.2024, For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2014-15; Respectively. The Revenue For A.Y.2016- 17Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Whether In. The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law

Section 14Section 14ASection 250

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.590, 595 & 1478/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Assistant V Persistent Systems Limited, Commissioner of Income s 402, Bhageerath, Senapati Tax,Pune. Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. PAN: AABCP1209Q Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee by Shri R.D.Onkar – AR Revenue by Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 17/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 24/10/20…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Pune vs. Persistent Systems Limited, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 590/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.590, 595 & 1478/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Assistant V Persistent Systems Limited, Commissioner Of Income S 402, Bhageerath, Senapati Tax,Pune. Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aabcp1209Q Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri R.D.Onkar – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 31.01.2024 & 06.05.2024, For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2014-15; Respectively. The Revenue For A.Y.2016- 17Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Whether In. The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law

Section 14Section 14ASection 250

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.590, 595 & 1478/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Assistant V Persistent Systems Limited, Commissioner of Income s 402, Bhageerath, Senapati Tax,Pune. Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. PAN: AABCP1209Q Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee by Shri R.D.Onkar – AR Revenue by Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 17/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 24/10/20…

Assistant Commissioner of Income-Tax, Pune vs. Persistent Systems Limited, Pune

In the result, appeal of the Revenue in ITA

ITA 1478/PUN/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Pune24 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Satbeer Singh Godara & Dr.Dipak P. Ripoteआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.590, 595 & 1478/Pun/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Assistant V Persistent Systems Limited, Commissioner Of Income S 402, Bhageerath, Senapati Tax,Pune. Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. Pan: Aabcp1209Q Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee By Shri R.D.Onkar – Ar Revenue By Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.Cit(Dr) Date Of Hearing 17/09/2024 Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2024 आदेश/ Order Per Dr. Dipak P. Ripote, Am: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Against The Separate Orders Of Ld.Commissioner Of Income Tax(Appeal)[Nfac], Under Section 250 Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 Dated 31.01.2024 & 06.05.2024, For The A.Y.2015-16, 2016-17 & 2014-15; Respectively. The Revenue For A.Y.2016- 17Has Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal : “1. Whether In. The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case & In Law

Section 14Section 14ASection 250

…।आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ”बी” "ायपीठ पुणेम"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCHES “B” :: PUNE BEFORE SATBEER SINGH GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER, AND DR.DIPAK P. RIPOTE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं. / ITA Nos.590, 595 & 1478/PUN/2024 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2016-17, 2014-15 & 2015-16 The Assistant V Persistent Systems Limited, Commissioner of Income s 402, Bhageerath, Senapati Tax,Pune. Bapat Road, Pune – 411016. PAN: AABCP1209Q Appellant/ Revenue Respondent / Assessee Assessee by Shri R.D.Onkar – AR Revenue by Shri Arvind Desai – Addl.CIT(DR) Date of hearing 17/09/2024 Date of pronouncement 24/10/20…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(2), Bengaluru vs. Manipal Health Enterprises Pvt Ltd, Bengaluru

In the result, the the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1208/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14A

…ake recourse to and work out the disallowance as per sub- section (2) and (3) of Sec. 14A of the Act. 14. I further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 11/247 Taxman 361/394 ITR 449/[(Civil Appeal No. 7020 of 2011, dated 8-5-2017], dealing with the statutory requirement of satisfaction on the part of the A.O as regards not accepting the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of the expenses claimed by him to have been incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income of the assessee, ha…

Manipal Health Systems Private Limited, Bangalore vs. DCIT, Central Circle 1(2), Bangalore

In the result, the the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1092/BANG/2024[2018-19]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Oct 2024AY 2018-19

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14A

…ake recourse to and work out the disallowance as per sub- section (2) and (3) of Sec. 14A of the Act. 14. I further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 11/247 Taxman 361/394 ITR 449/[(Civil Appeal No. 7020 of 2011, dated 8-5-2017], dealing with the statutory requirement of satisfaction on the part of the A.O as regards not accepting the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of the expenses claimed by him to have been incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income of the assessee, ha…

Manipal Health Enterprises Private Limited, Bangalore vs. ACIT, Circle 2(3)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the the revenue’s appeal is dismissed

ITA 1031/BANG/2024[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore24 Oct 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri George George K. & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuassessment Year : 2014-15

For Respondent: Shri Subramanian S., Jt.CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14A

…ake recourse to and work out the disallowance as per sub- section (2) and (3) of Sec. 14A of the Act. 14. I further find that the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 11/247 Taxman 361/394 ITR 449/[(Civil Appeal No. 7020 of 2011, dated 8-5-2017], dealing with the statutory requirement of satisfaction on the part of the A.O as regards not accepting the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of the expenses claimed by him to have been incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income of the assessee, ha…

Commissioner of Income Tax-Tda vs. M/S.Idea Cellular Ltd

ITTA/277/2018HC Telangana19 Sept 2024

Bench: SUJOY PAUL,NAMAVARAPU RAJESHWAR RAO

ACIT-15(3)(2), Mumbai vs. Surya Ferrous Alloys Pvt Ltd, Mumbai

Appeal are dismissed as having been rendered infructuous

ITA 1407/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Sept 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Ajay R. SinghFor Respondent: Shri Kishor Dhule
Section 143(1)Section 144BSection 147Section 148Section 148ASection 149Section 151ASection 40A(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "G” BENCH, MUMBAI SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax- Circle 15(3)(2) Room No. 460, 4th floor, Aaykar Bhavan, Mumbai. …………. Appellant Vs Surya Ferrous Alloys Pvt Ltd. 117, Skylark Building, Plot No. 63, Sector 11, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai- 400614. …………. Respondent [PAN : AAHCS8596H] CO No. 76/MUM/2024 (Assessment Year: 2015-16) Surya Ferrous Alloys Pvt Ltd. 117, Skylark Building, Plot No. 63, Sector 11, CBD Belapur, Navi Mumbai- 400614. [PAN : AAHCS8596H] …………. Appellant Vs Assistant Commission…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Sony India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1166/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Sony India Private Limited, vs. DCIT, Circle 24 (1), A-18, Mohan Cooperative Indl. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 044. (PAN : AABCS1571Q) DCIT, Circle 24 (1), vs. M/s. Sony India Private Limited, New Delhi. A-18, Mohan Cooperative Indl. Estate, New Delhi – 110 044. (PAN : AABCS1571Q) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Shri Parth, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 19.06.2024 Date of Order…

Sony India Private Limited, New Delhi vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed as indicated above and appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1026/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Aug 2024AY 2010-11

Bench: SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Shri Nageshwar Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR
Section 143Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘I’: NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI S.RIFAUR RAHMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S., JUDICIAL MEMBER M/s. Sony India Private Limited, vs. DCIT, Circle 24 (1), A-18, Mohan Cooperative Indl. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi – 110 044. (PAN : AABCS1571Q) DCIT, Circle 24 (1), vs. M/s. Sony India Private Limited, New Delhi. A-18, Mohan Cooperative Indl. Estate, New Delhi – 110 044. (PAN : AABCS1571Q) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : Shri Nageshwar Rao, Advocate Shri Parth, Advocate REVENUE BY : Shri Rajesh Kumar, CIT DR Date of Hearing : 19.06.2024 Date of Order…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 399/COCH/2023[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2017-18

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…claim of the Assessee qua the disallowance so offered by the Assessee is not being accepted. Reference in this regard was made to the following judicial pronouncements:  Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC)  Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co.Ltd. 394 ITR 449(SC)  Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 357(Karn.)  West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 135(Cal.)  Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt.Ltd. 123 Taxmann.com 38 (Bom)  Marg Ltd. 120 Taxmann.com 84 (Mad)  Esillor India (P) Ltd. 137 Taxmann.com 60 (Karn.)  CIT Vs. Hero Management Services Ltd.…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 397/COCH/2023[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…claim of the Assessee qua the disallowance so offered by the Assessee is not being accepted. Reference in this regard was made to the following judicial pronouncements:  Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC)  Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co.Ltd. 394 ITR 449(SC)  Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 357(Karn.)  West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 135(Cal.)  Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt.Ltd. 123 Taxmann.com 38 (Bom)  Marg Ltd. 120 Taxmann.com 84 (Mad)  Esillor India (P) Ltd. 137 Taxmann.com 60 (Karn.)  CIT Vs. Hero Management Services Ltd.…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 396/COCH/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…claim of the Assessee qua the disallowance so offered by the Assessee is not being accepted. Reference in this regard was made to the following judicial pronouncements:  Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC)  Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co.Ltd. 394 ITR 449(SC)  Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 357(Karn.)  West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 135(Cal.)  Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt.Ltd. 123 Taxmann.com 38 (Bom)  Marg Ltd. 120 Taxmann.com 84 (Mad)  Esillor India (P) Ltd. 137 Taxmann.com 60 (Karn.)  CIT Vs. Hero Management Services Ltd.…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 395/COCH/2023[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…claim of the Assessee qua the disallowance so offered by the Assessee is not being accepted. Reference in this regard was made to the following judicial pronouncements:  Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC)  Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co.Ltd. 394 ITR 449(SC)  Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 357(Karn.)  West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 135(Cal.)  Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt.Ltd. 123 Taxmann.com 38 (Bom)  Marg Ltd. 120 Taxmann.com 84 (Mad)  Esillor India (P) Ltd. 137 Taxmann.com 60 (Karn.)  CIT Vs. Hero Management Services Ltd.…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 394/COCH/2023[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…claim of the Assessee qua the disallowance so offered by the Assessee is not being accepted. Reference in this regard was made to the following judicial pronouncements:  Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC)  Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co.Ltd. 394 ITR 449(SC)  Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 357(Karn.)  West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 135(Cal.)  Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt.Ltd. 123 Taxmann.com 38 (Bom)  Marg Ltd. 120 Taxmann.com 84 (Mad)  Esillor India (P) Ltd. 137 Taxmann.com 60 (Karn.)  CIT Vs. Hero Management Services Ltd.…

Federal Bank Ltd, Kochi vs. ACIT Corp. Circle-1(1 ), Kochi

ITA 393/COCH/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Cochin13 Aug 2024AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Satbeer Singh Godara & Shri Amarjit Singh

For Appellant: Sri.Gopi, CAFor Respondent: Sri.Sanjit Kumar Das, CIT-DR
Section 143(3)Section 144Section 147Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…claim of the Assessee qua the disallowance so offered by the Assessee is not being accepted. Reference in this regard was made to the following judicial pronouncements:  Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs. CIT 402 ITR 640 (SC)  Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co.Ltd. 394 ITR 449(SC)  Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 357(Karn.)  West Bengal Infrastructure Development Finance Corporation Ltd. 143 Taxmann.com 135(Cal.)  Sociedade De Fomento Industrial Pvt.Ltd. 123 Taxmann.com 38 (Bom)  Marg Ltd. 120 Taxmann.com 84 (Mad)  Esillor India (P) Ltd. 137 Taxmann.com 60 (Karn.)  CIT Vs. Hero Management Services Ltd.…

Piaggio Vehicles Pvt Ltd, Pune vs. ACIT, Circle 4, Pune

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 611/PUN/2024[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Pune05 Aug 2024AY 2016-17

Bench: Ms. Astha Chandra & Shree Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Siddhesh ChauguleFor Respondent: Smt. Deepa Sanjay Hiray
Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 92C

…at the domestic company paying DOT does not do so on behalf of the shareholder nor does it act as an agent of the shareholder in paying the tax under S. 115-0, cannot be said to have been diluted or overruled by the Hon'ble SC in Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. (394 ITR 449) ('G&B SC decision'). It can be said that the Hon'ble SC has taken a different basis to reach the same conclusion but without diluting the reasoning of the Hon'ble Bombay HC that DOT is not a tax paid by the domestic company on behalf of the shareholder. [Refer Para 74 of the order of Hon’ble SB]. Appellant’s rebuttals The Appellant's rebuttals t…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the cross-objection filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 2731/DEL/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2024AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.S.Pannu & Shri Kul Bharat[Assessment Year : 2007-08] Dcit, Vs Ansal Housing & Construction Ltd., Central Circle-20, Ugf-15, Indraprastha Building, 21, New Delhi. Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. Pan-Aaaca0377R Appellant Respondent

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80Section 80I

…ted to be made out of interest free funds, no part of the interest bearing borrowed funds can be attributed to such investments/advances. Reliance placed on the judgment of Godrej & Boyce Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Manufacturing Company Ltd. vs DCIT 394 ITR 449 (SC); judgement of Hon’ble Karnatka High Court in the case of CIT vs Sridev Enterprises 192 ITR 165 (Kar.); and CIT vs Givo Ltd. in ITA No.941/2020 (Del.Trib.). 16. On the contrary, Ld. Sr. Counsel for the assessee, Shri Ajay Vohra, opposed the submissions of the Revenue and reiterated the submission made in the written synopsis. For the sak…

Ram Ratan Jangir, Amer vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward -7(2), Jaipur

In the result ground no. 1 raised by the

ITA 550/JPR/2024[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur22 Jul 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI (Judicial Member)

For Appellant: Sh. Anoop Bhatiya, CAFor Respondent: Smt. Monisha Choudhary (Addl. CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES,”SMC” JAIPUR Mk0 ,l- lhrky{eh] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh jkBksM deys'k t;UrHkkbZ] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: DR. S. SEETHALAKSHMI, JM & SHRI RATHOD KAMLESH JAYANTBHAI, vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 550/JP/2024 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Years : 2013-14 cuke Ram Ratan Jangir Income Tax Officer, Vs. Vill and Post Rampura Dabri, Ward-7(2), Ward No. 4, Amer Jaipur LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN/GIR No.: AANPJ 9614 L vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Sh. Anoop Bhatiya, CA jktLo dh vksj ls@ R…

Nisha Thomas, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-Drp-2, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal is allowed

ITA 2764/MUM/2024[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Jul 2024AY 2015-16

Bench: Ms Padmavathy S, Am & Shri Raj Kumar Chauhan, Jm

For Appellant: Shri Gunjan Kakkad, CAFor Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma, CIT-DR
Section 142(1)Section 147Section 148Section 148A

…age in the statute is clear, it has to be so interpreted and there is no scope for interpreting the provision on any other basis. The taxing statue should be strictly construed. [Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [2017] 81 taxmann.com 111/247 Taxman 361/394 ITR 449 (SC). 27. The interpretation as canvassed by the Revenue would render the first proviso to Section 149 of the Act redundant and otiose. The time limit to issue notice under section 148 of the Act had already expired on 1st April 2021 for Assessment Year 2013-2014 and 2014-2015, when Section 149 of the Act was amended. Therefore, reopening for Ass…