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 367,154 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

ACIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Bimal Kumar Jain, New Delhi

In the result, ITA No. 5999 /Del/2014 of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5999/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Nov 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri H.S.Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishiacit, Vs. Bimal Kumar Jain, 17, Meera Tower, 1St Floor, Cricle-19(1), New Delhi Wazirpur Indl. Area, New Delhi Pan: Aaepj6566J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri RS Singhvi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajeev Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 14Section 143Section 14A

…ttedly, the assessee has earned exempt income of Rs. 55204/- as per page No. 7 of the assessment order. The above issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd vs. CIT 372 ITR 694 wherein, in para No. 9 Hon'ble High Court has held that disallowance cannot swallow the entire exempt income. Therefore, the disallowance u/s 14A confirmed by the ld CIT (A) of Rs. 1545259/- is restricted up to Rs. 55204/-. 16. In the result, cross objection filed by the assessee is allowed. Order pronounced in the open court on 27/11/2017. - - (…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hero Fincorp Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 1374/DEL/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi16 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh.G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Sh.K.N.Charyvs Dcit, Hero Fincorp Ltd. Circle-11(1), 34, Community Centre, Basant Lok, New Delhi. Vasant Vihar, New Delhi-110057. Pan-Aaach0157J (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Sh. Gaurav Jain, Adv. & Ms. Deepika Agrawal, Ca Respondent By Sh. Amit Jain, Sr.Dr Date Of Hearing 14.11.2017 Date Of Pronouncement 16.11.2017 Order Per K.N.Charyaggrieved By The Order Dated 01.12.2015 In Appeal No.208/15-16 Passed By The Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeal) [In Short “Cit(A)”]-16, New Delhi For The Ay 2012-13, The Revenue Filed This Appeal On The Following Grounds:-

Section 14A

…r, he submits that without prejudice to his other legal contentions, such an amount may be disallowed. He prays that liberty may be granted for him to raise these contentions in respect of other years involving addition u/s 14A of the Act. 5. vs CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694 where it was held that disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of the Act cannot exceed the amount of tax exempt income, we limit the disallowance to Rs.91,350/- that could be made u/s 14A of the Act. Liberty is granted to the assessee to raise all the available legal contentions in case of other assessment years. 6. In the result, the appeal of th…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Ennore Tank Terminals Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos 2088/Mds/2017 &

ITA 2089/CHNY/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. P. Ranga Ramanujam, CA

Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

…ssee earned exempt income of Rs. 73,03,908/- & Rs. 1,77,92,834/- for ays 2011-12 & 2012-13, respectively. However, the AO disallowed Rs. 1,79,99,525/- & Rs. 1,81,31,202/-. Relying on the Delhi High Court decision in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd., 372 ITR 694, the Punjab & Haryana High Court decision in the case of Empire Package Pvt. Ltd., ITA No. 425 of 2015 dated 12.01.2016, the Jurisdictional ITAT decision in the case of Ambattur Clothing Ltd., in ITA No. 1643/Mds/2014 and ITA No. 910/Mds/2014 dated 28.12.2015 following the decision of Mumbai Bench of Tribunal in the case of M/s. Daga Global Ch…

DCIT Corporate Circle 2(1), Chennai vs. Ennore Tank Terminals Pvt. Ltd., Chennai

In the result, Revenue’s appeal in ITA Nos 2088/Mds/2017 &

ITA 2088/CHNY/2017[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai08 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri N.R.S. Ganesan & Shri S. Jayaraman

For Appellant: Shri. P. Ranga Ramanujam, CA

Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(ii)

Vakrangee Software Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No5792/Mum/2016 is

ITA 5834/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shrisaktijit Dey () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 14A

…decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Chemivest Ltd vs CIT (supra) held that the disallowance u/s 14A cannot exceed the exempt income. We further notice that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) has taken a similar view. After considering the relevant provisions observed that the window for disallowance was indicated in section 14A 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 exempt income surely cannot swallow the entire am…

Vakrangee Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No5792/Mum/2016 is

ITA 5792/MUM/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shrisaktijit Dey () & Shri G Manjunatha ()

Section 14A

DCIT Cen Cir 5(2), Mumbai vs. Prime Proeprty Development Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, all the three appeals of the revenue are dismissed

ITA 4081/MUM/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Nov 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran (Am) & Shri Ravish Sood(Jm)

Section 14A

…tted that the dividend income earned by the assessee was only Rs.1,18,155/- and the Ld CIT(A) has sustained addition u/s 14A to the extent of Rs.3,54,441/-. He submitted that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court has held in the case of Joint Investment P Ltd Vs. CIT (372 ITR 694) that the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act should not exceed the exempt income. He submitted that the Ld CIT(A) has sustained disallowance u/s 14A in excess of dividend income. He submitted that the assessee has accepted the decision of Ld CIT(A) 3 M/s. Prime Property Development Corporation Ltd. and the revenue should also not have any grievance…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Wave Industries Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6607/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Joginder Singh

Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…ned, the argument on behalf of the assessee is that the assessee itself made disallowance to the extent of exempt income, therefore, no further disallowance is permissible, for which reliance was placed upon the decision Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT 372 ITR 694 (Del.). In reply, the ld. Sr. DR filed written submission mentioning certain judicial orders, the same is kept on record. 2.2. We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. We note that the in the case of Metropolitan Exim Chem Ltd. (ITA No.5749/Mum/2014) vide order dated 01/08/2017 made an elaborate di…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Wave Infratech Pvt. Ltd., Noida

The appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 6606/DEL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Nov 2017AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Saini & Shri Joginder Singh

Section 14ASection 14A(2)

Ddb Mudra P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT Cir 6(3), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5656/MUM/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai02 Nov 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajesh Kumarassessment Year: 2011-12 M/S Ddb Mudra Pvt. Ltd. Dcit, Opp. Grand Hyatt, Circle-6(3), बनाम/ Santacruz (E) Mumbai Vs. Mumbai-400055 ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue) Pan. No.Aaacm5763H

Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…e disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income, we are in agreement with this contention. This view is supported by the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. versus Commissioner of Income Tax [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Del). Accordingly we direct the AO to restrict the addition to the exempt income. Accordingly this ground is partly allowed in favour of the assessee. 27. In view of the above findings the assessee’s appeals for the A.Y. 2006-07 being ITA No. 1086/Del/2015, A.Y. 2007-08 being ITA No. 1087/Del/2015, A.Y. 2008-09 being ITA No. 1088/Del/2015 are a…

M/S. Mulchandbhai & Sons, Ahmedabad vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(2)(4), Ahmedabad

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2371/AHD/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad31 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Shri Manish Boradआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 2371/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/S. Mulchandbhai & Sons, Vs. Income-Tax Officer, B-507, Ganesh Plaza, Ward-3(2)(4), Opp. Navrangpura Bus Stand, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad Pan : Aacfm 7364 F [ अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Aseem Thakkar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr Dr सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date Of Hearing : 26/10/2017 घोषणा क" तारीख /Date Of Pronouncement: 31/10/2017 आदेश/O R D E R Per Manish Borad: This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of The Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Ahmedabad Dated 13.07.2016 For Assessment Year 2012-13. 2. The Grievances Raised By The Assessee Are As Follows:-

For Appellant: Shri Aseem Thakkar, ARFor Respondent: Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr DR

Section 14ASection 194ASection 194A(3)(iv)Section 40Section 40a

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद "यायपीठ ‘SMC/D’ अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “SMC/D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI S.S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No. 2371/Ahd/2016 िनधा"रण वष"/Assessment Year: 2012-13 M/s. Mulchandbhai & Sons, Vs. Income-tax Officer, B-507, Ganesh Plaza, Ward-3(2)(4), Opp. Navrangpura Bus Stand, Ahmedabad Navrangpura, Ahmedabad PAN : AACFM 7364 F [ अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "त् यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee by : Shri Aseem Thakkar, AR Revenue by : Shri Prasoon Kabra, Sr DR सुनवाई क" तारीख/Date of Hearing : 26/10/2017 घोषणा क" तारी…

Mirah Realtors P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 14, Mumbai

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

ITA 4951/MUM/2015[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Hiro Rai, ARFor Respondent: M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…disallowance qua the exempt income earned by the assessee and that in the assessment year under consideration in assessee’s case the exempt income is only `2,15,625/-. We find that the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs CIT (372 ITR 694) has restricted the addition to the extent of exempt income only by observing as under: 9. In the present case, the AO has not firstly disclosed why the appellant/assessee's claim for attributing Rs. 2,97,440 as a disallowance under s. 14A had to be rejected. Taikisha Engg. India Ltd. (supra) says that the jurisdiction to proceed further and det…

Mirah Realtors P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 14, Mumbai

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

ITA 4950/MUM/2015[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 Oct 2017AY 2012-13

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am

For Appellant: Hiro Rai, ARFor Respondent: M.C. Omi Ningshen, DR

Section 143(3)Section 14A

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Jindal Stainless Steelway Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 3399/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi24 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Sh. K. N. Chary, Jm Ita No. 3399/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner Of Income Vs M/S Jindal Stainless Steelway Ltd., Tax, Circle-4(1), Jindal Centre, 12, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi New Delhi-110066 (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aabcj4346C Assessee By : Sh. Nipun Mittal, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Sampoornanand, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 27.09.2017 Date Of Pronouncement : 24.10.2017 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am: This Is An Appeal By The Department Against The Order Dated 31.03.2014 Of Ld. Cit(A)-Vii, New Delhi.

For Appellant: Sh. Nipun Mittal, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Sampoornanand, Sr. DR

Section 10(34)Section 143(1)Section 14A

…THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘D’, NEW DELHI Before Sh. N. K. Saini, AM and Sh. K. N. Chary, JM ITA No. 3399/Del/2014 : Asstt. Year : 2010-11 Dy. Commissioner of Income Vs M/s Jindal Stainless Steelway Ltd., Tax, Circle-4(1), Jindal Centre, 12, Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi New Delhi-110066 (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AABCJ4346C Assessee by : Sh. Nipun Mittal, CA Revenue by : Sh. Sampoornanand, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 27.09.2017 Date of Pronouncement : 24.10.2017 ORDER Per N. K. Saini, AM: This is an appeal by the department against the order dated 31.03.2014 of ld. CIT(A)-VII, New Delh…

M/S. Vrv Foods Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

ITA 6639/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

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…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Lemon Tree Hotels (P) Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 6070/DEL/2014[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Oct 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Sh. G.D.Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Sh.K.N.Charydcit, Vs Lemon Tree Hotels (P) Ltd., Circle-4(1), B-6/17, Safdarjang Enclave, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan-Aacck1698R (Appellant) (Respondent)

Section 14A

…om the common pool funds. Per contra, it is the argument of the Ld. AR that during the year under consideration, the assessee earned dividend income of Rs.4,83,547/- and the decision in Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694, is that by no stretch of imagination can Section 14A or Rule 8D be interpreted so as to mean that the entire tax exempt income was to be disallowed and the window for disallowance was indicated in Section 14A, and was only to the extent of disallowing expenditure “incurred by the assessee in relation to the tax exempt income”. He submitted tha…

Pr.Commossioner of Income Tax-7 vs. M/S Oscar Investment Ltd

ITA/779/2017HC Delhi09 Oct 2017

Bench: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR,HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

Section 14A

…ncome not forming pan of the Total income of the assessee even when clear, explicit and unambiguous provisions of section 14A read with Rule 8D do not stipulate any such condition?” 3. In Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) wherein this Court held as under: “9. In the present case, the AO has not firstly disclosed why the appellant/assessee‟s claim for attributing Rs. 2,97,440/- as ITA 779/2017 Page 2 of 2 a disallowance under Section 14A had to be rejected. Taikisha says that the jurisdiction to p…

Select Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the assessee for the assessment year

ITA 3751/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Oct 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G. D. Agrawal & Shri Amit Shukla

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Rana, CIT (DR)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 22Section 24

…restricted to the extent of exempt income earned and no further relief is sought for. In support of this proposition, he strongly referred and relied upon the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT, reported in (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Delhi). 20. The Ld. CIT-D.R., on the other hand, relied upon the orders of the Assessing Officer as well as the Ld. CIT (A). 21. Since the assessee’s only grievance before us is that, the disallowance under section 14A should be restricted to the extent of exempt income of Rs.7,63,867/-, therefore, following the ratio and principle laid down b…

The ACIT, Circle-4, Baroda vs. M/S. Welspun Projects Ltd., (Formerly Known As Msk Projects (India) Ltd., Baroda

ITA 2940/AHD/2013[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad28 Sept 2017AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Vartik R. Choksi, A.RFor Respondent: Shri K. Madhusudan, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 40Section 40A(7)Section 80I

…oth the lower authorities qua assessee’s exempt income of Rs.46,643/-. Learned counsel is again very fair in not disputing the impugned disallowance in principle. He only quotes hon’ble Delhi high court’s judgment in Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) that such a disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income amount itself. The Revenue is unable to rebut application of the above judicial precedent. We therefore direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the impugned disallowance to the extent of Rs.46,643/- only. The assessee partly succeeds in the instant substantive ground. 12. Learned…

Shyamala Pictures and Hotel Private Limited, Chennai vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1185/CHNY/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai27 Sept 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Sanjay Arora & Shri George Mathan

For Appellant: Shri Ashish Tripathi, Jt. CITFor Respondent: 04.07.2017

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 28

…ed by half. Again, inasmuch as interest in partnership firms is taxable, the same should in fact be excluded in reckoning the value of the investments yielding tax-free income. Further, as explained by the Hon'ble Court in Joint Investments Ltd. v. CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Del), the disallowance (of expenditure) u/s. 14A cannot exceed the amount of tax-exempt income earned during the year. 3. We shall consider each of the objections. True, the AO, where the assessee claims a particular amount (which could be nil as well), with reference to its accounts, as having been incurred in relation to the tax-exempt income…