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.

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 694)

Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT- 3(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is allowed

ITA 3184/MUM/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri S.L. JainFor Respondent: Shri Neil Phillip

Section 14A

…rised Representative submitted, under no circumstances, the disallowance under section 14A of the Act can exceed exempt income earned during the year. For such proposition, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) Joint Investments (P.) Ltd. v. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.); and ii) PCIT v/s Empire Package Pvt. Ltd., [2016] 286 CTR 457 (P&H). 8. The learned Departmental Representative submitted, after assessment year 2008–09, disallowance under section 14A of the Act has to be made in accordance with Rule 8D. 9. We have considered rival submissions and perused the material on record. Insofar as the disallow…

Shreyas R. Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT- 10(3)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal assessee is allowed

ITA 3308/MUM/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am Aayakr Apila Sam./ Ita No. 3308/Mum/2018 (Inaqa-Arna Baya- / Assessment Year 2011-12) Shreyas R Mehta, The Asst. Commissioner Of C/O Rasiklal Hiralal & Co., Ec Income Tax, Central Circle 4051-52, Bharat Diamond 10(3)(1), Room No. 212, 2Nd Vs. Bourse, Bandra Kurla Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Complex Mumbai-400 051 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 .. (Apilaaqai- / Appellant) (P`%Yaqaai- / Respondent) स्थायी लेखा सं./Pan No. Aacpm8602L अपीलाथी की ओर से / Appellant By : Shri Ajay C. Gosalia, Ar प्रत्यथी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Chaitanya Anjaria, Dr सुनवाई की तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 14-05-2019 घोषणा की तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement : 21-05-2019 Aadosa / O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Ajay C. Gosalia, ARFor Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria, DR

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण “SMC” न्यायपीठ म ुंबई में। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI श्री महावीर स ुंह, न्याययक दस्य एवुं श्री एन. के. प्रिान लेखा दस्य के मक्ष । BEFORE SRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JM AND SRI NK PRADHAN, AM Aayakr ApIla saM./ ITA No. 3308/Mum/2018 (inaQa-arNa baYa- / Assessment Year 2011-12) Shreyas R Mehta, The Asst. Commissioner of C/o Rasiklal Hiralal & Co., EC Income Tax, Central Circle 4051-52, Bharat Diamond 10(3)(1), Room No. 212, 2nd Vs. Bourse, Bandra Kurla Floor, Aayakar Bhavan, Complex Mumbai-400 051 M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020 .. (ApIlaaqaI- / Appellant) (p`%yaqaaI- / Respondent)…

DCIT, CC - 7(1), Mumbai vs. PAN India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, both the appeals are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2962/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Jay BhansaliFor Respondent: Shri Awungshi Gimsen

Section 115JSection 14ASection 154

…isallowance under section 14A r/w rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income earned during the year. In support of such contention, he relied upon the following decisions:– i) Cheminvest v/s CIT, [2015] 378 IT 33; ii) Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v/s CIT, [2015] 372 ITR 694; iii) PCIT v/s Caraf Builders and Constructions Pvt. Ltd., 101 taxmann.com 167; and iv) DCIT v/s Mahindra CIE Automotive Ltd., ITA no.6659/Mum./ 2014, dated 11.04.2018. 7. Further, learned Authorised Representative submitted that while computing book profit under section 115JB(2) of the Act, the Assessing Officer has made disallowance under secti…

M/S. Bulk Trade (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 3(2), Kolkata

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 2133/KOL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2014-15

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm ] I.T. A No. 2133/Kol/2018 A.Y 2014-15 M/S. Bulk Trade Pvt. Ltd V/S. I.T.O., Ward 3(2), Kolkata Pan: Aabcb 0286H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Aggarwal, Advocate, ld ARFor Respondent: Shri C.J. Singh, CIT, ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…o Rs.7,41,845/-. It transpires at the outset that assessee has derived exempt income 2 ITA No. 2133/Kol/2018-SMC-JM M/s. Bulk Trade P.Ltd amounting to Rs.3,750/- only during the relevant previous year. I quote the decision of the hon’ble Delhi high court in 372 ITR 694 (Del) in Joint Investments P.Ltd V/s. CIT to restrict the disallowance to the extent of Rs.3,750/- in these peculiar facts and circumstances. The assesse gets part relief in above terms. 4. This Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 15-05-2019 [ S.S.Godara ] Judicial Member Dated : 15 -05-2019 **PRADIP, Sr. P…

M/S. Rahul Metals, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Asansol

Appeal is partly allowed

ITA 1892/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata15 May 2019AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri S.S. Godara, Jm ] I.T. A No. 2133/Kol/2018 A.Y 2014-15 M/S. Bulk Trade Pvt. Ltd V/S. I.T.O., Ward 3(2), Kolkata Pan: Aabcb 0286H (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Subash Aggarwal, Advocate, ld ARFor Respondent: Shri C.J. Singh, CIT, ld.DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…o Rs.7,41,845/-. It transpires at the outset that assessee has derived exempt income 2 ITA No. 2133/Kol/2018-SMC-JM M/s. Bulk Trade P.Ltd amounting to Rs.3,750/- only during the relevant previous year. I quote the decision of the hon’ble Delhi high court in 372 ITR 694 (Del) in Joint Investments P.Ltd V/s. CIT to restrict the disallowance to the extent of Rs.3,750/- in these peculiar facts and circumstances. The assesse gets part relief in above terms. 4. This Assessee’s appeal is partly allowed. Order pronounced in the Court on 15-05-2019 [ S.S.Godara ] Judicial Member Dated : 15 -05-2019 **PRADIP, Sr. P…

M/S Sivan Securities Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3), Bangalore

ITA 715/BANG/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 14ASection 37

…his Tribunal order. Our attention was drawn to Para 8 of this Tribunal order and it was pointed out that in this case, the Tribunal has followed the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Joint Investments (P) Ltd. vs. CIT as reported in 372 ITR 694 wherein it was held that the disallowance u/s. 14A of IT Act cannot exceed the exempt income. He further pointed out that the Tribunal has considered one more judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 272 CTR 282 (Del) in addition to the Tribunal order of Mumbai Bench rendered in th…

M/S Sivan Securities Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3), Bangalore

ITA 714/BANG/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 14ASection 37

…his Tribunal order. Our attention was drawn to Para 8 of this Tribunal order and it was pointed out that in this case, the Tribunal has followed the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Joint Investments (P) Ltd. vs. CIT as reported in 372 ITR 694 wherein it was held that the disallowance u/s. 14A of IT Act cannot exceed the exempt income. He further pointed out that the Tribunal has considered one more judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 272 CTR 282 (Del) in addition to the Tribunal order of Mumbai Bench rendered in th…

M/S Sivan Securities Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3), Bangalore

ITA 713/BANG/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore08 May 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Arun Kumar Garodia & Shri Laliet Kumar

For Appellant: Shri C. Ramesh, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.N. Siddappaji, Addl. CIT (DR)

Section 14ASection 37

…his Tribunal order. Our attention was drawn to Para 8 of this Tribunal order and it was pointed out that in this case, the Tribunal has followed the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of Joint Investments (P) Ltd. vs. CIT as reported in 372 ITR 694 wherein it was held that the disallowance u/s. 14A of IT Act cannot exceed the exempt income. He further pointed out that the Tribunal has considered one more judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. as reported in 272 CTR 282 (Del) in addition to the Tribunal order of Mumbai Bench rendered in th…

DCIT, Cir-6(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue stand partly allowed

ITA 99/KOL/2016[2009-2010]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2009-2010

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 14A

…Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd, AYs. 2009-10 & 2010-11 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. Nos. 99 &100/Kol/2016 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd. Circle-6(2), Kolkata. (PAN: AAACW2369P) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 08.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement 03.05.2019 For the Appellant Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT, DR For the Assessee Shri D. S. Damle, FCA…

DCIT, Cir-6(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, both the appeals of the Revenue stand partly allowed

ITA 100/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 May 2019AY 2010-2011

Bench: Shri A. T. Varkey, Jm & Dr. A. L. Saini, Am]

Section 14A

…Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd, AYs. 2009-10 & 2010-11 आयकर अपील"य अधीकरण, "यायपीठ – “A” कोलकाता, IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH: KOLKATA (सम") "ी ऐ. ट". वक", "यायीक सद"य एवं डॉ. अजु"न लाल सैनी, लेखा सद"य) [Before Shri A. T. Varkey, JM & Dr. A. L. Saini, AM] I.T.A. Nos. 99 &100/Kol/2016 Assessment Years: 2009-10 & 2010-11 Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Vs. M/s. Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd. Circle-6(2), Kolkata. (PAN: AAACW2369P) Appellant Respondent Date of Hearing 08.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement 03.05.2019 For the Appellant Shri A. K. Nayak, CIT, DR For the Assessee Shri D. S. Damle, FCA…

Shri Vinay Bhasin, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5822/DEL/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri L.P. Sahuassessment Year: 2011-12 Vs Mr. Vinay Bhasin Jcit C-14, South Extension, Range-37 Part-Ii, New Delhi. New Delhi.

Section 143(1)Section 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI L.P. SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2011-12 vs Mr. Vinay Bhasin JCIT C-14, South Extension, Range-37 Part-II, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN No. AAAPB3445J APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by Sh. Salil Aggarwal, Adv. Sh. Shailesh Aggarwal Revenue by Sh. P.V. Gupta, Sr. DR Date of Hearing 15.04.2019 Date of Pronouncement 23.04.2019 ORDER PER SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, J.M. This appeal by assessee has been directed against the order of Ld.CIT(Appeals)-20, New Delhi dated 18.09.2015 for AY 2011- 12.…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Delhi

ITA 3883/DEL/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Apr 2019AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri H. S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri R. S. Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay I Bara, CIT DR

Section 142Section 147Section 153Section 153ASection 201(1)Section 36Section 40Section 40A(3)

…e of Rs. 15,96,000/- only. legal position to this effect is well supported from decision of Hon‘ble Supreme Court in case of Pr. CIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2018] 259 Taxman 314 (SC) and Delhi High Court in case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs. CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Del). relevant head note in case of Pr. CIT v. State Bank of Patiala [2018] 259 Taxman 314 (SC) is as under: Dharampal Satyapal Ltd Vs, DCIT ITA No. 3738, 3739/Del/2016 (A) & ITA No. 3882 & 3883/Del/2016(R) Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 ―Section 14A, read with section 263, of Income-tax The Act, 1961 - Expenditure incurred in relation to in…

Essar Power Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 6(2)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed

ITA 7329/MUM/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 Apr 2019AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey & Shri Manoj Kumar Aggarwal

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri T. Roumuan Paite

Section 143(3)Section 144C(13)Section 92C

…d. submitted, disallowance if any under section 14A r/w rule 8D has to be restricted to the exempt income earned during the year. We find substantial force in the aforesaid submissions of the assessee. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Joint Investment v/s CIT, 372 ITR 694 (Del.) has held that disallowance under section 14A of the Act cannot exceed the exempt income earned during the year. The same view was expressed by the Hon’ble P&H High Court in PCIT v/s State Bank of India, 393 ITR 476 (P&H). While dismissing the SLP of the Revenue, the Hon'ble Supreme Court upheld the aforesaid decision of the Hon’ble P&H Hig…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ozone Pharmaceuticals Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and those of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3772/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: A.Y. 2008-09

Section 14ASection 80I

…0. The ld. AR, reiterating the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A), further submitted a written synopsis stating that the disallowance should be limited to the extent of exempt income in view of the decision of Delhi High Court in Joint Investment vs. CIT, 372 ITR 694. It was also submitted that in ITA Nos. 2935, 2936 & 2937 and 3770, 3771 & 3772/Del/2015 12 case disallowance out of expenses incurred relating to the unit eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC is sustained, deduction u/s. 80IC may be allowed with regard to the enhanced profit as per CBDT Circular No. 37/16 dated 02.11.2016. 11. The ld. DR, on the ot…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ozone Pharmaceuticals Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and those of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3771/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: A.Y. 2008-09

Section 14ASection 80I

…0. The ld. AR, reiterating the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A), further submitted a written synopsis stating that the disallowance should be limited to the extent of exempt income in view of the decision of Delhi High Court in Joint Investment vs. CIT, 372 ITR 694. It was also submitted that in ITA Nos. 2935, 2936 & 2937 and 3770, 3771 & 3772/Del/2015 12 case disallowance out of expenses incurred relating to the unit eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC is sustained, deduction u/s. 80IC may be allowed with regard to the enhanced profit as per CBDT Circular No. 37/16 dated 02.11.2016. 11. The ld. DR, on the ot…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ozone Pharmaceuticals Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and those of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3770/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: A.Y. 2008-09

Section 14ASection 80I

…0. The ld. AR, reiterating the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A), further submitted a written synopsis stating that the disallowance should be limited to the extent of exempt income in view of the decision of Delhi High Court in Joint Investment vs. CIT, 372 ITR 694. It was also submitted that in ITA Nos. 2935, 2936 & 2937 and 3770, 3771 & 3772/Del/2015 12 case disallowance out of expenses incurred relating to the unit eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC is sustained, deduction u/s. 80IC may be allowed with regard to the enhanced profit as per CBDT Circular No. 37/16 dated 02.11.2016. 11. The ld. DR, on the ot…

M/S. Ozone Pharmaceutical Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and those of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2937/DEL/2015[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: A.Y. 2008-09

Section 14ASection 80I

…0. The ld. AR, reiterating the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A), further submitted a written synopsis stating that the disallowance should be limited to the extent of exempt income in view of the decision of Delhi High Court in Joint Investment vs. CIT, 372 ITR 694. It was also submitted that in ITA Nos. 2935, 2936 & 2937 and 3770, 3771 & 3772/Del/2015 12 case disallowance out of expenses incurred relating to the unit eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC is sustained, deduction u/s. 80IC may be allowed with regard to the enhanced profit as per CBDT Circular No. 37/16 dated 02.11.2016. 11. The ld. DR, on the ot…

M/S. Ozone Pharmaceutical Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and those of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2936/DEL/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2009-10

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: A.Y. 2008-09

Section 14ASection 80I

…0. The ld. AR, reiterating the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A), further submitted a written synopsis stating that the disallowance should be limited to the extent of exempt income in view of the decision of Delhi High Court in Joint Investment vs. CIT, 372 ITR 694. It was also submitted that in ITA Nos. 2935, 2936 & 2937 and 3770, 3771 & 3772/Del/2015 12 case disallowance out of expenses incurred relating to the unit eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC is sustained, deduction u/s. 80IC may be allowed with regard to the enhanced profit as per CBDT Circular No. 37/16 dated 02.11.2016. 11. The ld. DR, on the ot…

M/S. Ozone Pharmaceutical Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeals of assessee are allowed for statistical purposes and those of Revenue are partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2935/DEL/2015[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi15 Apr 2019AY 2008-09

Bench: : Shri Amit Shukla & Shri L.P. Sahu

For Appellant: A.Y. 2008-09

Section 14ASection 80I

…0. The ld. AR, reiterating the submissions made before the ld. CIT(A), further submitted a written synopsis stating that the disallowance should be limited to the extent of exempt income in view of the decision of Delhi High Court in Joint Investment vs. CIT, 372 ITR 694. It was also submitted that in ITA Nos. 2935, 2936 & 2937 and 3770, 3771 & 3772/Del/2015 12 case disallowance out of expenses incurred relating to the unit eligible for deduction u/s. 80IC is sustained, deduction u/s. 80IC may be allowed with regard to the enhanced profit as per CBDT Circular No. 37/16 dated 02.11.2016. 11. The ld. DR, on the ot…

ACIT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 2000/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata12 Apr 2019AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-(Kz) & Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…I.T.A. No. 2000/KOL/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 M/s. Oberoi Hotels (P) Limited IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, KOLKATA ‘C’ BENCH, KOLKATA Before Shri P.M. Jagtap, Vice-President (KZ) and Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi, Judicial Member I.T.A. Nos. 2000/KOL/2016 Assessment Year: 2010-2011 Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax,………………………..............Appellant Circle-8(2), Kolkata, Aayakar Bhawan, P-7, Chowringhee Square, Kolkata-700 069 -Vs.- M/s. Oberoi Hotels (P) Limited,...................................................Respondent 4, Mangoe Lane, Kolkata-700 001 [PAN: AAACO 3408 K] Appearances by: Dr…

Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

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

Also referred to as

Sections most often in play

Issues it is cited on

Judgments citing Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT

Phulchand Exports Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT- 3(2)(2), Mumbai

Shreyas R. Mehta, Mumbai vs. ACIT- 10(3)(1), Mumbai

DCIT, CC - 7(1), Mumbai vs. PAN India Network Infravest Pvt. Ltd., Mumbai

M/S. Bulk Trade (P) Ltd., Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward - 3(2), Kolkata

M/S. Rahul Metals, Kolkata vs. ITO, Ward-2(3), Asansol

M/S Sivan Securities Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3), Bangalore

M/S Sivan Securities Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3), Bangalore

M/S Sivan Securities Pvt Ltd, Bangalore vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-12(3), Bangalore

DCIT, Cir-6(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

DCIT, Cir-6(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Williamson Magor & Co. Ltd., Kolkata

Shri Vinay Bhasin, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Dharampal Satyapal Ltd., Delhi

Essar Power Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 6(2)(2), Mumbai

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ozone Pharmaceuticals Ltd., New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ozone Pharmaceuticals Ltd., New Delhi

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Ozone Pharmaceuticals Ltd., New Delhi

M/S. Ozone Pharmaceutical Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

M/S. Ozone Pharmaceutical Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

M/S. Ozone Pharmaceutical Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

ACIT, Circle-8(2), Kolkata vs. M/S Oberoi Hotels Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata