Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

372 ITR 694High Court2015#63 most cited

What is Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Disallowance under section 14A of the Income Tax Act cannot exceed the actual amount of exempt income earned by the assessee. This principle also applies when computing book profits under section 115JB.

803

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,181 Indian tax judgments — from 2015 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT · section 14A disallowance · exempt income expenditure limit · Rule 8D · section 115JB book profit · disallowance cannot exceed exempt income · Joint Investments · Delhi High Court 2015

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 8DSection 115JBSection 143(2)Section 10AASection 10B
Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

disallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 14asection 37section 10salaryprevious yearsection 80section 14companyindiatransfer

Judgments citing Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

DCIT, Chennai vs. Aban Investments P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 934/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.933, 934 & 935/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Aban Investments P. Ltd., Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), 113, Janpriya Crest, Pantheon Road, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai 600 008. [Pan: Aaaca2926J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 03.02.2022 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, All Dated 30.01.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2010- 11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. The First Common Ground Raised In All The Appeals Of The Revenue Relates To Restriction Of Disallowance Made Under Section 14A R.W.S. Rule 8D.

Section 14ASection 57

…of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly restricted the disallowance to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi 3 I.T.A. Nos.933 to 935/Chny/17 High Court in the case of Joint Investments P. Ltd. v. CIT 372 ITR 694. We find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed for both the assessment years. 2.4 In the assessment year 2012-13 also against the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D of ₹.3,21,97,329/-, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that the disallowance in this case has to be restricted…

DCIT, Chennai vs. Aban Investments P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, all the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 933/CHNY/2017[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.933, 934 & 935/Chny/2017 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2010-11, 2011-12 & 2012-13 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Aban Investments P. Ltd., Income Tax, Corporate Circle 1(1), 113, Janpriya Crest, Pantheon Road, Chennai – 600 034. Chennai 600 008. [Pan: Aaaca2926J] (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By Shri Clement Ramesh Kumar, Cit & : Shri P. Sajit Kumar, Jcit ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By Shri R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing 03.02.2022 : घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 31.03.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: These Three Appeals Filed By The Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Chennai, All Dated 30.01.2017 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2010- 11, 2011-12 & 2012-13. 2. The First Common Ground Raised In All The Appeals Of The Revenue Relates To Restriction Of Disallowance Made Under Section 14A R.W.S. Rule 8D.

Section 14ASection 57

…of the Act, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly restricted the disallowance to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi 3 I.T.A. Nos.933 to 935/Chny/17 High Court in the case of Joint Investments P. Ltd. v. CIT 372 ITR 694. We find no infirmity in the order of the ld. CIT(A) and accordingly, the ground raised by the Revenue is dismissed for both the assessment years. 2.4 In the assessment year 2012-13 also against the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D of ₹.3,21,97,329/-, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that the disallowance in this case has to be restricted…

B.V.Reddy Enterprises P Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT Corporate Circle 1(2), Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1971/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2011-12 B.V.Reddy Enterprises, 2 B.V.Reddy Enterprises, 2-1285, Vs. Acit, Corpn. Circle-1(2), Acit, Corpn. Circle B.V.Reddy Colony, Chittor B.V.Reddy Colony, Chittor-517 Chennai 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaccn 2252 L Aaccn 2252 L (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.Sridhar , ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Johnson, Addl CIT (

…ssessee on the ground that the assessee has made investment in earning the income and made the addition. In first appeal, the ld CIT(A) in the impugned order referred to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs CIT, 372 ITR 694 (Del) and also the decision of Chennai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ambattor Clothing Ltd vs JCIT in ITA No.1436, 1643/Mds/2014 & 910/Mds./2015 dt.28.12.2015, wherein, it was held that disallowance u/s.14A r.w Rule 8D should not exceed the exempt income. The assessee has claimed of earning Rs.2,02,786/- as dividend and requested for restricting t…

ACIT, Chennai vs. B.V.Reddy Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3276/CHNY/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2011-12 B.V.Reddy Enterprises, 2 B.V.Reddy Enterprises, 2-1285, Vs. Acit, Corpn. Circle-1(2), Acit, Corpn. Circle B.V.Reddy Colony, Chittor B.V.Reddy Colony, Chittor-517 Chennai 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaccn 2252 L Aaccn 2252 L (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.Sridhar , ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Johnson, Addl CIT (

…ssessee on the ground that the assessee has made investment in earning the income and made the addition. In first appeal, the ld CIT(A) in the impugned order referred to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs CIT, 372 ITR 694 (Del) and also the decision of Chennai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ambattor Clothing Ltd vs JCIT in ITA No.1436, 1643/Mds/2014 & 910/Mds./2015 dt.28.12.2015, wherein, it was held that disallowance u/s.14A r.w Rule 8D should not exceed the exempt income. The assessee has claimed of earning Rs.2,02,786/- as dividend and requested for restricting t…

ACIT, Chennai vs. B.V.Reddy Enterprises Pvt Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 3275/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2011-12 B.V.Reddy Enterprises, 2 B.V.Reddy Enterprises, 2-1285, Vs. Acit, Corpn. Circle-1(2), Acit, Corpn. Circle B.V.Reddy Colony, Chittor B.V.Reddy Colony, Chittor-517 Chennai 001 Pan/Gir No.Aaccn 2252 L Aaccn 2252 L (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri S.Sridhar , ARFor Respondent: Shri G.Johnson, Addl CIT (

…ssessee on the ground that the assessee has made investment in earning the income and made the addition. In first appeal, the ld CIT(A) in the impugned order referred to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs CIT, 372 ITR 694 (Del) and also the decision of Chennai Tribunal in the case of M/s. Ambattor Clothing Ltd vs JCIT in ITA No.1436, 1643/Mds/2014 & 910/Mds./2015 dt.28.12.2015, wherein, it was held that disallowance u/s.14A r.w Rule 8D should not exceed the exempt income. The assessee has claimed of earning Rs.2,02,786/- as dividend and requested for restricting t…

Continental Device India P.Ltd, New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle-6(2), New Delhi

Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed

ITA 8314/DEL/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Mar 2022AY 2016-17

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

For Appellant: Shri Pradeep Dinodia, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Dhanesta, Senior DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ed many of the contentions raised by the assessee, however reduced the disallowance to the extent of exempt income of Rs. 33,10,110/- relying upon the decision of the 5 Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.). 6. Before us, ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the Tribunal in assessee’s own case in ITA No.71/Del/2018 in AY 2014-15 vide order dated 14.10.2020 has deleted the similar disallowance made u/s 14A on account of interest expenditure under Rule 8D(2)(iii) on the ground that assessee has surplus fund for making the investment. In…

Prasad Film Laboratories Private Limited, Hyderabad vs. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-14(1), Hyderabad

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

ITA 1133/HYD/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad22 Feb 2022AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoassessment Year: 2016-17 Prasad Film Laboratories Vs. The Assistant Private Limited, Commissioner Of Income Hyderabad. Tax, Circle – 14(1), Hyderabad. Pan : Aabcp2280P. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri V. Shiva Kumar. Revenue By: Shri Rohit Mujumdar. Date Of Hearing: 17.02.2022 Date Of Pronouncement: 22.02.2022 O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao, A.M. This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) – 6, Hyderabad Dated 24.05.2019 For The Assessment Year 2016-17. 2. The Brief Facts Of The Case Are That The Appellant Is A Private Limited Company Incorporated Under The Provisions Of The Companies Act, 1956. It Is Engaged In The Business Of Post-Film Production Activities Viz. Printing & Processing Of Cinematographic Films, Dubbing, Editing, Recording, Telecine & Projecting, Hiring Of Outdoor Equipment / Cameras Etc. The Appellant Filed Return Of Income For The A.Y. 2016-17 On 05.10.2016 Declaring A Loss Of Rs.2,95,28,869/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, The Assessment Was Completed By The Assessing Officer Vide Order Dt.25.12.2018 Passed U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As “The Act”) At A Total Loss Of Rs.2,85,37,337/-. While Doing So, The Assessing Officer Made Disallowance U/S 14A R.W.R. 8D(2)(Iii) Of Rs.9,91,532/- Rejecting The Contention Of The Appellant That No Indirect Expenditure Was Incurred To Earn Any Exempt Income. While Doing So, The Assessing Officer Computed The Amount Of Disallowance At 1% Of The Average Value Of The Investments.

For Appellant: Shri V. Shiva KumarFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…e, for the purpose of computing the average value of the investments, the investments which yielded exempt income alone has to be considered in the light of the law laid down by the 3 Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 374 ITR 694 (Delhi), the decisions of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the cases of ACB India Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Marg Ltd. Vs. CIT, 318 CTR (Mad.) 148 and CIT Vs. Shriram Ownership Trust 318 CTR (Mad.) 233 and also by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank Vs. Jt.CIT, 95 Taxman.com 41 (Kar.) 8. I…

M/S. Sri Venkatachalapathy Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., Rajapalayam vs. DCIT, Corporate Cirlce - 2, Madurai

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

ITA 529/CHNY/2020[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.528 & 529/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Sri Venkatachalapathy Spinning Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Mills Private Limited,454, Kothankulam Income Tax, Village, Srivilliputhur Road, Corporate Circle 2, Rajapalayam 626 117. Madurai. [Pan:Aadcs9037R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Madurai Both Dated 20.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Effective Common Ground Raised In Both The Appals Of The Assessee Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Made Under Section 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 R.W. Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962. 2

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.528 and 529/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s. Sri Venkatachalapathy Spinning Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Mills Private Limited,454, Kothankulam Income Tax, Village, Srivilliputhur Road, Corporate Circle 2, Rajapalayam 626 117. Madurai. [PAN:AADCS9037R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से /…

M/S. Sri Venkatachalapathy Spinning Mills Pvt. Ltd., Rajapalayam vs. DCIT, Corporate Cirlce - 2, Madurai

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

ITA 528/CHNY/2020[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.528 & 529/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/S. Sri Venkatachalapathy Spinning Vs. The Deputy Commissioner Of Mills Private Limited,454, Kothankulam Income Tax, Village, Srivilliputhur Road, Corporate Circle 2, Rajapalayam 626 117. Madurai. [Pan:Aadcs9037R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri S. Sridhar, Advocate ""थ" की ओर से/Respondent By : Shri Ar V Sreenivasan, Addl. Cit सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 10.02.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Madurai Both Dated 20.12.2019 Relevant To The Assessment Years 2013-14 & 2014-15. The Only Effective Common Ground Raised In Both The Appals Of The Assessee Relates To Confirmation Of Disallowance Made Under Section 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 R.W. Rule 8D Of The Income Tax Rules, 1962. 2

For Appellant: Shri S. Sridhar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri AR V Sreenivasan, Addl. CIT
Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ‘ए’ "ायपीठ, चे"ई IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी वी. दुगा" राव, "ाियक सद" एवं "ी मनोज कुमार अ"वाल, लेखा सद" के सम" । Before Shri V. Durga Rao, Judicial Member & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal, Accountant Member आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.528 and 529/Chny/2020 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15 M/s. Sri Venkatachalapathy Spinning Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Mills Private Limited,454, Kothankulam Income Tax, Village, Srivilliputhur Road, Corporate Circle 2, Rajapalayam 626 117. Madurai. [PAN:AADCS9037R] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" की ओर से /…

Shriram Capital Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Cir-6(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3255/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3168 & 3255/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcs2726B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3216 & 3217/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1), Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 29.08.2018 Relevant To The 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…the Act. 2.3 The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee, facts of the case and by following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Delhi), the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D to ₹.17,10,42,084/- as well as directed to exclude the disallowance under section 14A of the Act while computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act for the assessment year 2012-13. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee is i…

DCIT, Corp Cir-6(1), Chennai vs. Shriram Capital Ltd, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3217/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3168 & 3255/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcs2726B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3216 & 3217/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1), Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 29.08.2018 Relevant To The 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…the Act. 2.3 The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee, facts of the case and by following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Delhi), the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D to ₹.17,10,42,084/- as well as directed to exclude the disallowance under section 14A of the Act while computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act for the assessment year 2012-13. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee is i…

DCIT, Corp Cir-6(1), Chennai vs. Shriram Capital Ltd, Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3216/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3168 & 3255/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcs2726B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3216 & 3217/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1), Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 29.08.2018 Relevant To The 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…the Act. 2.3 The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee, facts of the case and by following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Delhi), the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D to ₹.17,10,42,084/- as well as directed to exclude the disallowance under section 14A of the Act while computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act for the assessment year 2012-13. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee is i…

Shriram Capital Ltd, Chennai vs. DCIT, Corp Cir-6(1), Chennai

In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed and the appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3168/CHNY/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai18 Feb 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri V. Durga Rao & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwalआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3168 & 3255/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Corporate Circle 6(1), Chennai 600 017. Chennai 600 034. [Pan:Aabcs2726B] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. Nos.3216 & 3217/Chny/2018 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2014-15 The Deputy Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Shriram Capital Limited, Shriram House, 1St Floor, No. 4, Income Tax, Corporate Circle 6(1), Burkit Road, T. Nagar, Chennai 600 034. Chennai 600 017. (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ"/Respondent) Assessee By : Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate Department By Shri Darzakhum Songate, Cit : सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date Of Hearing : 03.01.2022 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 18.02.2022 आदेश /O R D E R Per V. Durga Rao: Both The Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee As Well As Revenue Are Directed Against Different Orders Of The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) 15, Chennai Dated 29.08.2018 Relevant To The 2

For Appellant: Shri R. Sivaraman, Advocate
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…the Act. 2.3 The assessee carried the matter in appeal before the ld. CIT(A). After considering the submissions of the assessee, facts of the case and by following the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Delhi), the ld. CIT(A) directed the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance under section 14A r.w. Rule 8D to ₹.17,10,42,084/- as well as directed to exclude the disallowance under section 14A of the Act while computing the book profit under section 115JB of the Act for the assessment year 2012-13. 3. On being aggrieved, the assessee is i…

Century Real Estate Holdings Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 1588/BANG/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 Feb 2022AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri Ramakrishna, CA
Section 10Section 132Section 139(1)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153ASection 153B

…urther submitted that the quantum of disallowance u/s. 14A of the Act cannot exceed the exempt income. In support of the proposition, he also placed reliance on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Joint Investments (P) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 372 ITR 694 (Del.) We have perused the submissions advanced by both sides in the light of records placed before us. 7. We observe that identical issues has been considered by Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2009-10 which is followed by this Tribunal in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2010-11 (supra). “9. We have heard both the…

DCIT Central Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. East Coast Constructions & Industries Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as

ITA 1028/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1027 & 1028/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S. East Coast Constructions Tax & Industries Ltd., Central Circle-1(1) 4, Buhari Building, Chennai-34. Moores Road, Chennai-600 006. Pan: Aaace 1662P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: 02.02.2022
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 260ASection 801ASection 80ISection 8O

…l further noted that in case disallowance if any is required, then it has to be restricted to the extent of dividend income earned for relevant assessment year, as has been held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments P.Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 694. We find that this year also the assessee has taken a similar plea in light of theory of mixed funds and thus, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to go back to file of the Assessing Officer to re-examine claim of the assessee. Hence, we set aside the issue to the file of the years. 9. The next issue that came up for our conside…

DCIT Central Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. East Coast Constructions & Industries Ltd., Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by the Revenue is treated as

ITA 1027/CHNY/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai14 Feb 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Vice- & Shri G. Manjunathaआयकरअपीलसं./I.T.A.Nos.1027 & 1028/Chny/2018 ("नधा"रणवष" / Assessment Years: 2013-14 & 2014-15) The Deputy Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S. East Coast Constructions Tax & Industries Ltd., Central Circle-1(1) 4, Buhari Building, Chennai-34. Moores Road, Chennai-600 006. Pan: Aaace 1662P (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr. M. Rajan, CITFor Respondent: 02.02.2022
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 260ASection 801ASection 80ISection 8O

…l further noted that in case disallowance if any is required, then it has to be restricted to the extent of dividend income earned for relevant assessment year, as has been held by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments P.Ltd. (2015) 372 ITR 694. We find that this year also the assessee has taken a similar plea in light of theory of mixed funds and thus, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to go back to file of the Assessing Officer to re-examine claim of the assessee. Hence, we set aside the issue to the file of the years. 9. The next issue that came up for our conside…

Keimed Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 553/CHNY/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.547 & 548, 550, 551 & 553/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Keimed Pvt. Ltd., V. The Asst. Commissioner Of No.10-3-316A, Income Tax, Masab Tank, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderbad-500 028. Chennai-34. [Pan: Aabck 4532 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Mr.R.N.Siddappaji, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…for the year under consideration. Finally, in so far as restricting disallowance of expenses u/s.14A to the extent of exempt income, we find that the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2015] 372 ITR 694, had considered an identical issue and held that the disallowance contemplated u/s.14A cannot shallow entire exempt income earned for the year. In other words, disallowance of expenses relatable to the exempt income u/s.14A of the Act cannot exceeds exempt income earned for the relevant period. Therefore, we direct the AO to re-compute the dis…

Keimed Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 551/CHNY/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.547 & 548, 550, 551 & 553/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Keimed Pvt. Ltd., V. The Asst. Commissioner Of No.10-3-316A, Income Tax, Masab Tank, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderbad-500 028. Chennai-34. [Pan: Aabck 4532 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Mr.R.N.Siddappaji, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…for the year under consideration. Finally, in so far as restricting disallowance of expenses u/s.14A to the extent of exempt income, we find that the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2015] 372 ITR 694, had considered an identical issue and held that the disallowance contemplated u/s.14A cannot shallow entire exempt income earned for the year. In other words, disallowance of expenses relatable to the exempt income u/s.14A of the Act cannot exceeds exempt income earned for the relevant period. Therefore, we direct the AO to re-compute the dis…

Keimed Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 550/CHNY/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.547 & 548, 550, 551 & 553/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Keimed Pvt. Ltd., V. The Asst. Commissioner Of No.10-3-316A, Income Tax, Masab Tank, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderbad-500 028. Chennai-34. [Pan: Aabck 4532 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Mr.R.N.Siddappaji, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…for the year under consideration. Finally, in so far as restricting disallowance of expenses u/s.14A to the extent of exempt income, we find that the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2015] 372 ITR 694, had considered an identical issue and held that the disallowance contemplated u/s.14A cannot shallow entire exempt income earned for the year. In other words, disallowance of expenses relatable to the exempt income u/s.14A of the Act cannot exceeds exempt income earned for the relevant period. Therefore, we direct the AO to re-compute the dis…

Keimed Limited, Hyderabad vs. ACIT, Central Circle-3(1), Chennai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 548/CHNY/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Jan 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri V. Durga Rao & Hon’Ble Shri G. Manjunathaआयकर अपील सं./Ita Nos.547 & 548, 550, 551 & 553/Chny/2019 िनधा"रण वष" /Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2012-13, 2013-14, 2014-15 & 2015-16 M/S.Keimed Pvt. Ltd., V. The Asst. Commissioner Of No.10-3-316A, Income Tax, Masab Tank, Central Circle-3(1), Hyderbad-500 028. Chennai-34. [Pan: Aabck 4532 F] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Mr.T.Banusekar, CAFor Respondent: Mr.R.N.Siddappaji, CIT
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 234B

…for the year under consideration. Finally, in so far as restricting disallowance of expenses u/s.14A to the extent of exempt income, we find that the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT reported in [2015] 372 ITR 694, had considered an identical issue and held that the disallowance contemplated u/s.14A cannot shallow entire exempt income earned for the year. In other words, disallowance of expenses relatable to the exempt income u/s.14A of the Act cannot exceeds exempt income earned for the relevant period. Therefore, we direct the AO to re-compute the dis…