How many judgments cite Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT?

803 judgments on BharatTax cite Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (372 ITR 694), spanning 2015 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 37(1), Section 8D, Section 115JB, Section 143(2).

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 14A Section 143(3)Section 37(1)Section 8D Section 115JB Section 143(2)Section 10AA Section 10B

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

disallowance under section 14a disallowance u/s 14a section 14a section 37 section 10 salary previous year section 80 section 14 company india transfer

Judgments citing Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Ats Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Central Circle, Noida

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 5408/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Ms. Surbhi Goyal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 36(1)(iii)

…nly Rs.1,97,449/- as dividend income, therefore, impugned addition is unjustified and disallowance should restricted to the dividend income of Rs.1,97,499/- and relied upon Judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd., [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Del.) (HC). 18 ITA.Nos.3080/D/2017, 5408 & 5601/D/2018 M/s. ATS Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi 22. On the other hand, Ld. D.R. relied upon the Orders of the authorities below. 23. Considering the rival submissions, we are of the view that the issue is same as have been considered in A.Y. 2012-2013. Following the reasons for decision for the sa…

M/S. Ats Infrastructure Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Noida

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 3080/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri N.K. Billaiya

For Appellant: Ms. Surbhi Goyal, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Ved Prakash Mishra, Sr. DR

Section 36(1)(iii)

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4102/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.N. Mehta, advocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT/DR

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘F’ NEW DLEHI BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI K. NARASIMHA CHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITANo. 4077/Del/2015 Assessment Year: 2008-09 Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., vs. DCIT, Circle 14(1), Global Business Park, Tower A, New Delhi. 4th Floor, M.G. Road, Gurgaon. PAN AAACP 1272G Assessment Year: 2008-09 DCIT, Circle 14(1), vs. Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi. Global Business Park, Tower A, 4th Floor, M.G. Road, Gurgaon. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by: Shri K.N. Mehta, advocate Respondent by: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT/DR Date of…

M/S. Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 4077/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2020AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Shri K.N. Mehta, advocateFor Respondent: Smt. Sulekha Verma, CIT/DR

Section 115Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14A

ACIT, Circle - 15(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Abci Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

Appeal is dismissed

ITA 1084/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata10 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri J.Sudhakar Reddy & Shri S.S.Godaraassessment Year: 2012-13

Section 143(3)

…dividend income only in lower appellate proceedings. Hon'ble Delhi high court’s decision in Joint Investment Ltd. vs. ITA No.1048/Kol/2018 Assessment Year 2012-13 ACIT, Cir-15(1), Kol. Vs M/s ABCI Infrastructures Pvt. Ltd. Page 10 Commissioner of Income Tax 372 ITR 694 (Del) holds that such a disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income amount itself. We thus uphold the CIT(A)’a findings qua this last issue as well. This Revenue’s appeal is dismissed. 11. Order pronounced in open court on 10/01/2020 (लेखा सद'य) ("या)यक सद'य) (J.Sudhakar Reddy) Judicial Member *Dkp-Sr.PS *दनांकः- 10/01/2020 कोलकाता / Kolkata आ…

Siroya Developers Pvt.Ltd., Mumbai vs. Siroya Developers Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 3668/MUM/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Jan 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Siroya Developers Pvt. Ltd. Dy. Commissioner Of Income-Tax-3(3)(2), 808, Raheja Chambers, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Nariman Point, Vs. Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 021

For Appellant: Shri B.V. JhaveriFor Respondent: Shri N. Padmanaban, Sr. A.R

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…s Siroya Developers Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-3(3)(2) 4 ITA No.3668/Mum/2018 A.Y. 2012-13 income. Our aforesaid view is supported by the judgement of the Hon’ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del). In the aforesaid case, it was observed by the Hon‟ble High Court that the disallowance envisaged in Sec. 14A r.w. Rule 8D cannot exceed the amount of the exempt income. The Hon‟ble High Court in the said case had observed as under : “By no stretch of imagination can Sec. 14A or Rule 8D be interpreted so as to mean that the entire tax exemp…

ACIT Central Circle 3(1), Chennai vs. Pn Power Generating Company P Ltd., Chennai

In the result, Ground Nos

ITA 1631/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jan 2020AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri George Mathan & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं./Ita No.1631/Chny/2017 धनिाजरण वर्ज Assessment Year: 2011-12 The Assistant Commissioner Of M/S. Ppn Power Generating Income Tax, Company P. Limited, Central Circle 3 (1), Vs. Jhaver Plaza, Iii Floor, No.46, Nungambakkam High Road, No.1A, Nungambakkam High Chennai – 600 034. Road, Chennai – 600 034 [Pan: Aabcp 8131D] (अपीलार्थी/Appellant) (प्रत्यथी/Respondent) अपीलाथी की ओर से/ Appellant By : Mr. A. Sundararajan, Addl.Cit प्रत्यथी की ओर से /Respondent By : Mr. S. Vidya, Advocate सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 06.01.2020 घोर्णा की तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement : 06.01.2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per George Mathan: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Revenue Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-3 Chennai In I.T.A. No.98/2015-16/Cit(A)-3 Dated 28.03.2017 For The Assessment Year 2011- 12. 2. Mr. A. Sundararajan, Additional Cit Represented On Behalf Of The Revenue & Mr. S. Vidya Represented On Behalf Of The Assessee. :- 2 -:

For Appellant: Mr. A. Sundararajan, Addl.CITFor Respondent: Mr. S. Vidya, Advocate

…ance u/s.14A should not exceed the exempt income itself as attained finality. The issue is also squarely covered by the :- 8 -: decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in 372 ITR 694. In the circumstances, as it is that the learned CIT(A) has followed judicial discipline in following the decision of the Co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, as also it is noticed that the issue is now squarely covered by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court and against which the S.L.P by the Revenue is also dismissed, the findings of the…

Essar Ports Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 5(1)(2), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in terms of our aforesaid observations

ITA 1831/MUM/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Jan 2020AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri M.Balaganesh & Shri Ravish Soodm/S Essar Ports Ltd. Dcit, 5(1)(2) (Formerly Known As Essar Shipping Ports & Logistics Ltd.) Aayakar Bhavan, 11, K.K. Marg, Mahalaxmi, Vs. Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 034

For Appellant: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, cit D.R

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 14ASection 92C

…(2) the disallowance under Sec.14A cannot exceed the amount of exempt income earned by the assessee during the year, we find, that the said issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the Hon‟ble High Court of Delhi in the case of Joint Investments Vs. CIT ( 372 ITR 694) (Del). Also, a similar view had been taken by the Hon‟ble High Court of Punjab & Haryana in Pr. CIT Vs. State Bank of Patiala (2017) 393 ITR 476 (P & H). The „Special Leave Petition‟ (for short „SLP‟) filed by the revenue against the aforesaid the order of the Hon‟ble High Court of Punjab and Haryana had been dismissed by the Hon‟ble Supreme Cou…

DCIT Corporate Circle 5(2), Chennai vs. Pdr Investments Pvt Ltd., Chennai

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

ITA 1273/CHNY/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai02 Jan 2020AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Ms. R. Anitha, JCITFor Respondent: Sh. R. Vijayaraghavan, Advocate

Section 14A

…ccording to the Ld. counsel, the Assessing Officer has taken the entire investments even though majority of them has not resulted in earning of any income. Placing reliance on another judgement of Delhi High Court in Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT(2015) 372 ITR 694, the Ld. counsel submitted that the window for disallowance was indicated in Section 14A of the Act and was only to the extent of disallowing expenditure “incurred by the assessee in relation to the tax exempt income’. This proportion or portion of the tax exempt income surely cannot swallow the entire amount as has happened in this case. More…

ITO- 11(3)(4), Mumbai vs. Yash Vikram Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the revenue for assessment year 2013-

ITA 3133/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Shamim Yahya (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The I.T.O.-11 (3)(4), M/S Yash Vikram Room No. 429, Aayakar Bhavan, Infrastructure Private Limited, 4Th Floor, M.K. Marg, 662/8 Kanyakumari, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Sir S.V. Marg, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400059 Pan: Aaacy2465N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue By : Bharti Singh (Dr) Assessee By : None Date Of Hearing: 16/12/2019 Date Of Pronouncement: 30/12/2019

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Bharti Singh (DR)

Section 14Section 143Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “G”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2013-14 The I.T.O.-11 (3)(4), M/s Yash Vikram Room No. 429, Aayakar Bhavan, Infrastructure Private Limited, 4th Floor, M.K. Marg, 662/8 Kanyakumari, Mumbai - 400020 Vs. Sir S.V. Marg, Andheri (East), Mumbai - 400059 PAN: AAACY2465N (Appellant) (Respondent) Revenue by : Bharti Singh (DR) Assessee by : None Date of Hearing: 16/12/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 30/12/2019 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM The revenue has filed the present appeal against the order dated 30.03.2018 pa…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Central Circle-1(3), Bangalore vs. M/S Pune Dynasty Projects Pvt Ltd, Bangalore

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 3260/BANG/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore26 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri B.R Baskaran & Shri Pavan Kumar Gadale

For Appellant: Shri Anushri, C.AFor Respondent: Shri G Gurusamy, CIT (DR)

Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “C’’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI B.R BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.3260 & 3261/Bang/2018 Assessment year : 2013-14 & 2014-15 The Dy. Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s Pune Dynasty Projects Pvt. Ltd., 1st Floor, Embassy Point, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru. 150 Infantry Road, Bengaluru-560 001. PAN – AAECP 1340 D APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri Anushri, C.A Respondent by : Shri G Gurusamy, CIT (DR) Date of hearing : 20.11.2019 Date of Pronouncement : 26.12.2019 O R D E R Per B.R Baskaran, Accountant Member :…

M/S. Galgotia Publication (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Noida

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

ITA 1239/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Sushma Chowla, Jm & Sh. N.K.Billaiya, Am आयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.1238 & 1239/Del/2017 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years- 2012-13 & 2013-14 िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष"

For Appellant: Sh. P.K.Misra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S.N.Meena, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…nd income of Rs.830/- and the issue which has been urged before us is the disallowance to be restricted to the amount of dividend income earned. We find that the said issue has been decided by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Joint Investment Pvt.Ltd. vs CIT 372 ITR 694 (Del.) and CIT vs Holcim (India) Pvt.Ltd. 272 CTR 282 (Del.). Following the same parity of reasoning, we hold that the disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D of Rules is restricted to Rs.830/-. Hence, grounds raised by the assessee in this appeal are allowed. 6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed. Assessment Years- 2012-13 &…

M/S. Galgotia Publication (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, Noida

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

ITA 1238/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Dec 2019AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Sh. P.K.Misra, CAFor Respondent: Sh. S.N.Meena, Sr.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Vrv Foods Ltd., Noida

ITA 4456/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Aggarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 143Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…isallowance cannot be more than the exempt income earned during the year under assessment as has been held by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 8 ITA No.6639/Del./2014 ITA No.4121/Del./2016 ITA No.4456/Del./2016 (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.). So, we are of the considered view that AO/CIT(A) have erred in making disallowance of Rs.65,731/- for AY 2010-11 u/s 14A as against the exempt income of Rs.8,000/- mechanically, so the disallowance is ordered to be restricted to Rs.8,000/- equivalent to the exempt income earned by the assessee company. Ground No.2 of assessee’s appeal f…

Vrv Foods Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 4121/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Kuldip Singh

For Appellant: Shri Mukesh Aggarwal, FCAFor Respondent: Shri S.S. Rana, CIT DR

Section 143Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

DCIT- CC-5(1), Mumbai vs. Hubtown Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, cross objection filed by the assesee is treated as allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 2764/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai13 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri G. Manjunatha & Shri Ravish Sooddcit, Cc-5(1) Vs. M/S. Hubtown Ltd. Room No.1928 19Th Floor Akruti Trade Centre, 6Th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Point Road No.7, Marol-Midc Mumbai-400 021 Andheri(E) Mumbai-400 093

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

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “H”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JUDICIAL MEMBER DCIT, CC-5(1) Vs. M/s. Hubtown Ltd. Room No.1928 19th Floor Akruti Trade Centre, 6th Floor Air India Building, Nariman Point Road No.7, Marol-MIDC Mumbai-400 021 Andheri(E) Mumbai-400 093 PAN/GIR No. AAACA6101D (Appellant) .. (Respondent) & Cross Objection No.163/Mum/2019 (Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/s. Hubtown Ltd. Vs. DCIT, CC-5(1) Akruti Trade Centre, 6th Floor Room No.1928 19th Floor Road No.7, Marol-MIDC Air India Building, Nariman Point Andheri(E) Mumbai-400 021 Mum…

M/S. Pepsico India Holding Private Limited, Gurgaon vs. ACIT, New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 6077/DEL/2014[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Dec 2019AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaasstt. Year: 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri K.N. Mehta, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Surender Pal, Sr. DR

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…sallowance u/s 14A should be restricted to the dividend income. A copy of the said order dated 2nd June, 2016 was filed. Ld. AR also placed reliance on the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT reported in 372 ITR 694 and on the decision of the 3 PepsiCo India Holding Private Limited vs ACIT 4. Per contra, the Ld. DR placed reliance on the concurrent findings of the lower authorities and submitted that the disallowance had been correctly made. 5. We have heard the rival submissions and have also perused the material on record. It is seen that the year under…

T.K.M.Global Logistics Limited, Kolkata vs. ACIT, Ward - 15(1), Kolkata

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

ITA 83/KOL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 Dec 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Sri J. Sudhakar Reddy & Sri S.S. Godara) Assessment Year: 2013-14 Tkm Global Logistics Limited.........………........................................................……………….…......Appellant Room No. 710 & 711 7Th Floor Diamond Heritage 16, Strand Road Kolkata – 700 001 [Pan : Aabct 2426 M] Vs. Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Ward-15(1), Kolkata………..........….………....…....Respondent Appearances By: Mr. Ajit Korde, Advocate & Ms. Rachna Agarwal, Ca, Appeared On Behalf Of The Assessee. Dr. P.K. Srihari, Cit Sr. D/R, Appearing On Behalf Of The Revenue. Date Of Concluding The Hearing : November 26Th, 2019 Date Of Pronouncing The Order : December 11Th, 2019 Order Per J. Sudhakar Reddy, Am :-

Section 144C(5)Section 14ASection 154Section 92Section 92CSection 92C(3)

…stricted to this figure in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the restricted to this figure in view of the judgment of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment (P) L Joint Investment (P) Ltd. vs. CIT reported in [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Delhi). The Assessing Officer has disallowed an amount of Rs.13,89,779/ Assessing Officer has disallowed an amount of Rs.13,89,779/-, in this case. Respectfully, , in this case. Respectfully, following the judgment in the case of following the judgment in the case of Joint Investment (P) Ltd. (supra) Joint Investment (…

Laxmi Ventures (India) Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the revenue for A

ITA 1631/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai11 Dec 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & M/S. Laxmi Ventures (India) Vs. Dy. Commissioner Of Ltd., Income Tax-6(3) / 7(1)(2), 36/40, Mahalaxmi Bridge Mumbai Arcade, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai – 400 026 Pan/Gir No.Aaacl1982G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner Of Vs. M/S. Laxmi Ventures (India) Income Tax-7(1)(2), Ltd., Room No.10, 36/40, Mahalaxmi Bridge 1St Floor, Aayakar Arcade, Bhavan, M.K.Road Mahalaxmi, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 026 Pan/Gir No.Aaacl1982G (Appellant) .. (Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 37Section 40A(2)(b)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A”, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM & SHRI M.BALAGANESH, AM & M/s. Laxmi Ventures (India) Vs. Dy. Commissioner of Ltd., Income Tax-6(3) / 7(1)(2), 36/40, Mahalaxmi Bridge Mumbai Arcade, Mahalaxmi, Mumbai – 400 026 PAN/GIR No.AAACL1982G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Dy. Commissioner of Vs. M/s. Laxmi Ventures (India) Income Tax-7(1)(2), Ltd., Room No.10, 36/40, Mahalaxmi Bridge 1st Floor, Aayakar Arcade, Bhavan, M.K.Road Mahalaxmi, Mumbai – 400 020 Mumbai – 400 026 PAN/GIR No.AAACL1982G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Haridas Bhat Revenue by Shri Anadi…

India Nivesh Limited, Mumbai vs. CIT(A)- 10, Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee for assessment year 2014-

ITA 3391/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Dec 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri S. Rifaur Rahman (Am) & Shri Ram Lal Negi (Jm) Assessment Year: 2014-15 India Nivesh Limited, The Cit (A)-10, 601-602, Sukh Sagar, Mittal Court, Nariman Point, N.S. Patkar Marg, Mumbai - 400021 Girgaom Chowpatty, Vs. Mumbai - 400007 Pan: Aabci6743E (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Achal Bangani (AR)For Respondent: Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora (DR)

Section 10(34)Section 143Section 14ASection 36(1)(iii)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “C”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) Assessment Year: 2014-15 India Nivesh Limited, The CIT (A)-10, 601-602, Sukh Sagar, Mittal Court, Nariman Point, N.S. Patkar Marg, Mumbai - 400021 Girgaom Chowpatty, Vs. Mumbai - 400007 PAN: AABCI6743E (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Achal Bangani (AR) Revenue by : Shri Kumar Padmapani Bora (DR) Date of Hearing: 11/09/2019 Date of Pronouncement: 09/12/2019 O R D E R PER RAM LAL NEGI, JM This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 23.03.2018 passed by t…