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

International Cargo Terminals and Infrastructure Pvt Ltd, Mumbai vs. Dy CIT CC 6(4), Mumbai

Accordingly, in terms of our aforesaid observations, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6974/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () The Dcit, Central Circle-6(4), M/S International Cargo Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air Vs. Terminals & Infrastructure India Building, Nariman Point, Private Limited, Unit No.801, Mumbai – 400 021 Godrej Coliseum, C-Wing, Off Somaiya Hospital Road, Sion (East), Mumbai 400 022 Pan No. Aaacu5182C (Revenue) (Assessee) M/S International Cargo The Dcit, Central Circle-6(4), Terminals & Infrastructure Vs. Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air Private Limited, Unit No.801, India Building, Nariman Point, Godrej Coliseum, C-Wing, Mumbai – 400 021 Off Somaiya Hospital Road, Sion (East),Mumbai 400 022

For Appellant: Shri Y.P. Trivedi, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…y in agreement with the same. Our aforesaid view that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the amount of the exempt income received by the assessee during the year is fortified by the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Joint Investments Vs. ACIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) ITA Nos. 6892 & 6974/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2016-17 10 The DCIT, Central Circle-6(4) Vs. M/s International Cargo Terminals & Infrastructure P. Ltd. (ii) DCIT Vs. Craft Builders and Constructions (2019) 414 ITR 122 (Del) [SLP filed by the revenue was thereafter dismissed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in 112 taxman.com 322 (SC)] (iii) Nirved Traders…

Dy CIT CC 6 (4), Mumbai vs. M/S International Cargo Terminals & Infrastructure Pvt Ltd., Mumbai

Accordingly, in terms of our aforesaid observations, the appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed

ITA 6892/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri S.Rifaur Rahman () & Shri Ravish Sood () The Dcit, Central Circle-6(4), M/S International Cargo Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air Vs. Terminals & Infrastructure India Building, Nariman Point, Private Limited, Unit No.801, Mumbai – 400 021 Godrej Coliseum, C-Wing, Off Somaiya Hospital Road, Sion (East), Mumbai 400 022 Pan No. Aaacu5182C (Revenue) (Assessee) M/S International Cargo The Dcit, Central Circle-6(4), Terminals & Infrastructure Vs. Room No. 1925, 19Th Floor, Air Private Limited, Unit No.801, India Building, Nariman Point, Godrej Coliseum, C-Wing, Mumbai – 400 021 Off Somaiya Hospital Road, Sion (East),Mumbai 400 022

For Appellant: Shri Y.P. Trivedi, A.RFor Respondent: Ms. Shreekala Pardeshi, D.R
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…y in agreement with the same. Our aforesaid view that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the amount of the exempt income received by the assessee during the year is fortified by the following judicial pronouncements: (i) Joint Investments Vs. ACIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) ITA Nos. 6892 & 6974/Mum/2019 A.Y. 2016-17 10 The DCIT, Central Circle-6(4) Vs. M/s International Cargo Terminals & Infrastructure P. Ltd. (ii) DCIT Vs. Craft Builders and Constructions (2019) 414 ITR 122 (Del) [SLP filed by the revenue was thereafter dismissed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Court in 112 taxman.com 322 (SC)] (iii) Nirved Traders…

DCIT, Cen. Circle-4(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Runwal Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

ITA 6102/MUM/2019[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Sept 2021AY 2016-17

Bench: Shri Pramod Kumar, Vp & Shri Amarjit Singh, Jm आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 6102/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2016-17) Dcit, Cen, Circle-4(10) बिधम/ M/S. Runwal Developers Room No.1918, 19Th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 1St Floor, Runwal Chambers, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. First Road, Chembur, Mumbai-400022. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 5294/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/S. Runwal Developers Pvt. बिधम/ Dcit, Cen, Circle-4(10) Room No.1918, 19Th Floor, Ltd. Vs. 1St Floor, Runwal Chambers, Air India Building, Nariman First Road, Chembur, Point, Mumbai-400021. Mumbai-400022. स्थायी लेखा सं./जीआइआर सं./Pan/Gir No. : Aaacr0395J (अपीलाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) Assessee By: Shri Rishabh Shah Revenue By: Shri Bharat Andhle (Dr) सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 22/06/2021 घोषणा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 06/09/2021 आदेश / O R D E R Per Amarjit Singh (Jm): The Assessee As Well As Revenue Have Filed The Above Mentioned Appeals Against The Order Dated 20.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -52, Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y. 2016-17. Ita. No.6102/Mum/2019 2. The Revenue Has Filed The Present Appeal Against The Order Dated 20.06.2019 Passed By The Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals) -52, 5294/M/2019 A.Y. 2016-17 Mumbai [Hereinafter Referred To As The “Cit(A)”] Relevant To The A.Y.2016- 17. 3. The Revenue Has Raised The Following Grounds: -

For Appellant: Shri Rishabh ShahFor Respondent: Shri Bharat Andhle (DR)
Section 115JSection 139(9)Section 143(2)Section 144Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “D” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI PRAMOD KUMAR, VP AND SHRI AMARJIT SINGH, JM आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 6102/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year:2016-17) DCIT, Cen, Circle-4(10) बिधम/ M/s. Runwal Developers Room No.1918, 19th Floor, Pvt. Ltd. Vs. 1st Floor, Runwal Chambers, Air India Building, Nariman Point, Mumbai-400021. First Road, Chembur, Mumbai-400022. आयकर अपील सं/ I.T.A. No. 5294/Mum/2019 (निर्धारण वर्ा / Assessment Year: 2016-17) M/s. Runwal Developers Pvt. बिधम/ DCIT, Cen, Circle-4(10) Room No.1918, 19th Floor, Ltd. Vs. 1st Floor, Runwal Chambers, Air India Building…

Paliwal Gdr Homestyles (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 10(1), New Delhi

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

ITA 6712/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Sept 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Dr.B.R.R.Kumarassessment Year : 2014-15 Paliwal Gdr Homestyles (P.) Ltd., Vs Dcit, 38, Functional Indl. Estate, Circle-10(1), Paharganj, New Delhi-110092 New Delhi. Pan-Aaccp3904F Appellant Respondent Appellant By Ms. Monika Aggarwal, Ca Respondent By Ms. Mrinalini Sapra, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 26.08.2021 Date Of Pronouncement 03.09.2021

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ould be made in excess of the exempt income. In support of this contention, Ld. Counsel for the assessee 2 | P a g e Assessment Year : 2014-15 relied on the judgement of Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court rendered in the case of Joint Investment P.Ltd. vs CIT 372 ITR 694 (Del.). 7. Per contra, Ld. Sr. DR supported the orders of the authorities below. 8. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The Revenue has not controverted the fact that during the year under appeal, the assessee had earned a dividend income of Rs.49,489/- only. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the c…

Rain Cements Limited (Formerly Known As Rain Cii Carbon India Limited ), Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1471/HYD/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…no such details to this effect form part of records before us. There is further no rebuttal to the fact that the impugned disallowance is much less than the exempt income itself as per hon'ble Delhi high court’s decision in Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Delhi). We :- 12 -: ITA Nos.1950 & 2020/Hyd/2017 & 1471/Hyd/2018 therefore deem it appropriate in these peculiar facts and circumstances to affirm the impugned disallowance. The latter assessee fails in its second substantive grievance. This last appeal ITA No. 1471/Hyd/2018 is partly allowed in above terms. 9. These twin assessees’ appeals a…

Rain Cements Limited, Hyderabad vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 2020/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…no such details to this effect form part of records before us. There is further no rebuttal to the fact that the impugned disallowance is much less than the exempt income itself as per hon'ble Delhi high court’s decision in Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Delhi). We :- 12 -: ITA Nos.1950 & 2020/Hyd/2017 & 1471/Hyd/2018 therefore deem it appropriate in these peculiar facts and circumstances to affirm the impugned disallowance. The latter assessee fails in its second substantive grievance. This last appeal ITA No. 1471/Hyd/2018 is partly allowed in above terms. 9. These twin assessees’ appeals a…

Rain Industries Limited, Hyderabad vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-3(1), Hyderabad

Appeals are partly allowed in above terms

ITA 1950/HYD/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad24 Aug 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S.Godara & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahuappellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nishant Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Rohit Mujumdar, DR
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 92BSection 92C

…no such details to this effect form part of records before us. There is further no rebuttal to the fact that the impugned disallowance is much less than the exempt income itself as per hon'ble Delhi high court’s decision in Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Delhi). We :- 12 -: ITA Nos.1950 & 2020/Hyd/2017 & 1471/Hyd/2018 therefore deem it appropriate in these peculiar facts and circumstances to affirm the impugned disallowance. The latter assessee fails in its second substantive grievance. This last appeal ITA No. 1471/Hyd/2018 is partly allowed in above terms. 9. These twin assessees’ appeals a…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 7, New Delhi vs. Pnb Housing Finance Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the cross objection of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 5969/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Aug 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Sh. S. Krishnan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh. Farhat Khan, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(viii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Addl. CIT, Spcl. Range-7, vs. PNB Housing Finance Ltd., 9th Floor Antriksh Bhawan, New Delhi. 22, K.G. Marg, New Delhi. C.O. No. 18/Del/2021 (in ITA No. 5969/Del/2017 Assessment Year: 2014-15 PNB Housing Finance Ltd., vs. Addl. CIT, Spcl. Range-7, 9th Floor Antriksh Bhawan, New Delhi. 22, K.G. Marg, New Delhi. PAN : AAACP3682N (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Sh. S. Krishnan, Advocate Revenue by : Sh. Farhat Khan, Sr. DR Date o…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Rrpr Holding Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue in ITA No

ITA 192/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Aug 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Pawan Singh[A.Y 2009-10]

For Appellant: Shri Sachit Jolly, AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Sushma Singh, CIT- DR
Section 14A

…n of taxing interest income at 10% is confirmed. The grounds of appeal are accordingly disposed off.” 10. At the very outset, we are of the considered view that the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Joint Investments [P] Ltd 59 Taxmann.com 295 squarely applies to the facts of the case and the same read as under: “The third, and in the opinion of this Court, important anomaly which we cannot be unmindful is that whereas the entire tax exempt income is Rs. 48,90,000/. The disallowance ultimately directed works out to nearly 110 per cent of that sum, i.e., Rs. 52,56,197. By no st…

M/S TDS Management Consultants P. Ltd., Mohali vs. DCIT, Mohali

In the result, appeal of the Assessee is partly allowed

ITA 17/CHANDI/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh02 Aug 2021AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri Arvind Badoni, CAFor Respondent: Shri Ashok Kumar, Addl. CIT
Section 143(1)Section 14A

…han the exempt income. It was stated that the exempt income in this case was of Rs. 10,760/- therefore the disallowance could have been made to that extent only. The reliance was placed on the following case laws: • Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Del) • Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT(2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del) • CIT Vs. Winsome Textile Industries Ltd. [2009] 319 ITR 204 (P&H) • Order of the ITAT Chandigarh Bench in case of M/s Highway Industries Ltd. Vs. The ACIT in ITA No. 515/Chd/2015 dt. 16/06/2016. 8. In his rival submissions the Ld. DR strongly supported the impugned order passed by the Ld.…

ITO, Ward- 12(2), New Delhi vs. Indica Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3852/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2014-15

For Appellant: Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Kapil Goel, Advocate
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80ISection 8D(2)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘C’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2014-15 Income-tax Officer, vs. Indica Industries Pvt. Ltd. Ward 12(2), New Delhi. A-4, Greater Kailash, Part-I New Delhi PAN : AAACI0233Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Ms. Anima Barnwal, Sr. DR Respondent by: Sh. Kapil Goel, Advocate Date of hearing: 29/07/2021 Date of order : 29/07/2021 ORDER PER K. NARASIMHA CHARY, J.M. Aggrieved by the order dated 27/03/2018 passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-4, New D…

Addl. CIT, Special Range- 9, New Delhi vs. Tv Today Network Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5204/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi29 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Anil Chaturvedi & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Madhur Aggarwal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Prakash Dubey, Senior DR
Section 14ASection 36(1)(va)

…6/2014 and 299/2014 (Del.); (iv) CIT vs. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd. ITA 115/2014 & 119/2014 dated 25.11.2014 (Del.); (v) DCM Ltd. vs. DCIT, Circle 10(1), New Delhi and Vice- Versa – 2015 (9) TMI 1110 (ITAT Delhi); (vi) Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Del.); 5 ITA No.5204/Del./2017 (vii) CIT vs. Hero Cycles Ltd. (2010) 189 taxmann 50 (Punj & Har.); and (viii) M/s. ACB India Ltd. vs. ACIT ITA No.615/2014 dated 24.03.2015 (Del.) 9. Bare perusal of the facts on record shows that as against earned exempt income of Rs.2,34,585/- during the year under assessment, assessee company has suo motu m…

ACIT Central Circle 1(1), Chennai vs. Tcp Limited, Chennai

In the result, appeal filed by Revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 3069/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai28 Jul 2021AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri V.Durga Rao & Shri G.Manjunatha

For Appellant: Mrs. S.Vidya, C.A ""For Respondent: 22.07.2021
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(ii)Section 40

…ical issue and held that disallowances contemplated u/s.14A cannot exceed exempt income earned for the year under consideration. A similar view has been taken by the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Joint Investments Pvt .Ltd vs. CIT reported in 372 ITR 694, where it was held that disallowances contemplated u/s.14A cannot swallow entire exempt income for the year under consideration. In this case, the assessee has earned dividend income of Rs.6,99,349/-, whereas the Assessing Officer has computed disallowance of Rs.6,99,349/- . Therefore, we are of the considered view that disallowance computed b…

Addl. CIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. United Hotels Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2155/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: PendingITAT Delhi28 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. M/S. United Hotels Limited Special Range – 9, The Ambassador Hotel, New Delhi Sujan Singh Park, Cornwallis Road, Pan No. Aaacu 0031 C New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. D.R. Revenue By Shri Jagdish Ajmani, C.A. Date Of Hearing: 14/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/07/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am:

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(ii)

…ed by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) who after relying on the decision rendered by Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT (2011) 203 Taxman 364 and in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694, deleted the addition. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) Revenue is now in appeal before us. 19. Before us, Learned DR supported the order of AO. Learned AR on the other hand reiterated the submission made by the AO and CIT(A) and further submitted that assessee had earned dividend income of Rs.50,900/- but has suo moto disallowed Rs.3,12,523/- u…

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Nimai Developers Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2115/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi28 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Anil Chaturvedi & Sh. Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, Vs. M/S. United Hotels Limited Special Range – 9, The Ambassador Hotel, New Delhi Sujan Singh Park, Cornwallis Road, Pan No. Aaacu 0031 C New Delhi-110003 (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By Shri Prakash Dubey, Sr. D.R. Revenue By Shri Jagdish Ajmani, C.A. Date Of Hearing: 14/07/2021 Date Of Pronouncement: 28/07/2021 Order Per Anil Chaturvedi, Am:

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(ii)

…ed by the order of AO, assessee carried the matter before the CIT(A) who after relying on the decision rendered by Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd vs. CIT (2011) 203 Taxman 364 and in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694, deleted the addition. Aggrieved by the order of CIT(A) Revenue is now in appeal before us. 19. Before us, Learned DR supported the order of AO. Learned AR on the other hand reiterated the submission made by the AO and CIT(A) and further submitted that assessee had earned dividend income of Rs.50,900/- but has suo moto disallowed Rs.3,12,523/- u…

Hero Future Energies Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3131/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri K.Narasimha Chary

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…addition of Rs. 14,25,522/-, which was confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A). 5. Only plea taken by the assessee before us at the time of argument is that in view of the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Joint Investments P. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of the Act cannot exceed the amount of tax-exempt income, and therefore, the disallowance should be restricted to the difference between the tax-free income and the disallowance made by the assessee. In view of this binding precedent rendered by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court, we are of the considered o…

DCIT, Circle- 7(1), New Delhi vs. Decent Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4534/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA No.4522 &4534/Del/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15 DCIT Decent Financial Services Circle – 7 (1) Vs Pvt. Ltd. A-86, DDA Shed, New Delhi Phase-II, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi PAN No. AAACD2899P (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Mahesh Thakur, Sr. DR Respondent by Sh. Amit Sharma, Advocate Date of hearing: 08/07/2021 Date of Pronouncement: 08/07/2021 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: ITA No. 4522/Del/2018 and 4534/Del/2018 ar…

DCIT, Circle- 7(1), New Delhi vs. Decent Financial Services Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4522/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. N. K. Billaiya & Sh. Amit Shukla(Through Video Conferencing)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘B’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) ITA No.4522 &4534/Del/2018 Assessment Year: 2013-14 & 2014-15 DCIT Decent Financial Services Circle – 7 (1) Vs Pvt. Ltd. A-86, DDA Shed, New Delhi Phase-II, Okhla Industrial Area, New Delhi PAN No. AAACD2899P (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Mahesh Thakur, Sr. DR Respondent by Sh. Amit Sharma, Advocate Date of hearing: 08/07/2021 Date of Pronouncement: 08/07/2021 ORDER PER N. K. BILLAIYA, AM: ITA No. 4522/Del/2018 and 4534/Del/2018 ar…

Gebr Pfeiffer India Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl.CIT, Special Range-4, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands allowed

ITA 6902/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 Jul 2021AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…at there is no proper record of satisfaction as to the expenses incurred by the assessee for earning the exempt income. By following the decision reported in CIT versus Taikisha Engineering India Ltd 275 CTR (Del.) 316 and Joint Investments (P) Ltd versus CIT 372 ITR 694 (Del), we are of the opinion that the AO at the first GEBR Pfeiffer (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ACIT instance should have examined the correctness of the statement made by the assessee that no expenses were incurred for earning the exempt income during the year and if and only if the learned AO is not satisfied on this account after making reference…

Atharva Consortium and Realty Private Limited, Pune vs. Income-Tax Officer, Ward - 1(1), Pune

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 2416/PUN/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune18 Jun 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Inturi Rama Rao, Am & Shri S. S. Viswanethra Ravi, Jm आयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.2416/Pun/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Atharva Consortium & Realty Private Limited, 326, Ashok Vijay Complex, M.G. Road, Pune-411001. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant Pan : Aagca0449N बनाम / V/S. Ito, Ward-1(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee By : Shri Suhas Bora Revenue By : Shri Vitthal Bhosale सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing : 15.06.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 18.06.2021 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Order Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Pune (‘Cit(A)’ For Short) Dated 02.08.2017 For The Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. The Appellant Raised The Following Grounds Of Appeal :- “1. The Learned Cit (Appeals) Erred In Confirming The Addition Made By The Ao Of Rs. 1,98,733/- On Account Of Disallowances U/S 14A On The Ground That The Appellant Is Not Maintaining Separate Fund Flow Statement Regarding Investment Yielding Exempt Income & Investment In General Business Activity Without Appreciating The Submissions Given By The Appellant. The Ao Failed To Apply His Mind On The Main Contention That No Expenditure Is Required For Earning Exempt Income.

For Appellant: Shri Suhas BoraFor Respondent: Shri Vitthal Bhosale
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण “ए” "यायपीठ पुणे म" । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH, PUNE (Through Virtual Court) BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM आयकर अपील सं. / ITA No.2416/PUN/2017 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2013-14 Atharva Consortium And Realty Private Limited, 326, Ashok Vijay Complex, M.G. Road, Pune-411001. .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant PAN : AAGCA0449N बनाम / V/s. ITO, Ward-1(1), ……""यथ" / Respondent Pune. Assessee by : Shri Suhas Bora Revenue by : Shri Vitthal Bhosale सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date of Hearing : 15.06.2021 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 18.06.202…