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 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

M/S. Liberty Shoes Ltd., Karnal vs. ACIT, Karnal

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

ITA 2273/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi22 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2009-10 M/S Liberty Shoes Ltd., Acit, Karnal Circle, G.T. Road, Gharaunda, Vs Karnal. Karnal. Pan: Aaacl3146K (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Satish Goel, AdvocateFor Respondent: Smt. Naina Soin Kapil, Sr. DR
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 40ASection 80Section 80I

…reserves the investments were made in the subsidiaries with an intention to promote its own business. Further, according to the assessee, they have not received any tax-free income by way of dividend in the year. 15. In Joint Investment P. Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694, the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court held that the disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A of the Act cannot exceed the amount of tax-exempt income and in CIT vs Holcim India P. Ltd. (2014) 272 CTR 282, it was held that Section 14A cannot be invoked when no exempt income was earned. 16. It is a question of fact to be verified as to whether a taxpay…

Arjav Diamonds (India) P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT 5(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7467/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai17 May 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Ravish Sood, Jm Arjav Diamonds (India) Pvt. Vs. Acit – 5(1), Mumbai Ltd., 314, Prasad Chambers, Opera House, Mumbai – 400 004 Pan/Gir No. Aagca2472D Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43Section 43(5)

…argued that disallowance u/s.14A should be restricted to the amount of exempt income earned by the assessee during the year. For this proposition, he relied on the following judicial pronouncements. 1. Cheminvest Ltd., 378 ITR 33 2. Joint Investments v. CIT (372 ITR 694 (Del) 3. Indus Valley Investments v DCIT being ITA No.3763/Del/2013 for A.Y.2009-10 dated 29/04/2015 4. M/s. Daga Global Chemicals vs. Asst. CIT being ITA No.5592/Mum/2012 dated 01/01/2015. 5. M/s. Slyvex Cable Co. Pvt. Ltd., v Dy. CIT being ITA No.8581/Mum/2011 for A.Y.2008-09 dated 24/02/2016. 5. We have deliberated on the judicial pronouncemen…

Vineet P. Mehta, Mumbai vs. ITO 33(3)(5), Mumbai

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

ITA 733/MUM/2017[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai15 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am Shri Vineet P Mehta Vs. Ito 33(3)(5), 4Th Floor, Om Plaza Mumbai – 400 077 Vasanji Lalji Road Kandivali (W) Mumbai – 400 067 Pan/Gir No. Aospm0453M Appellant) Respondent) ..

Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…3,731/- , PPF interest of Rs.16,885/- and long term gain of Rs.1,65,040/-. In view of the following judicial pronouncements, disallowance u/s.14A r.w.r.8D should not exceed the exempt income earned by the assessee during the year. 1) Joint Investments v. CIT [372 ITR 694 (Del)] 2) Indus Valley Investments v. DCIT being ITA NO: 3763/De1/2013 for AY. 2009-10 dated 29.04.2015 3) Essar Properties Ltd v. DCIT (ITA No: 423/Mum/2015) for AY. 2009-10 dated 19.07.2016 4) M/s Slyvex Cable Co. Pvt. Ltd. v Dy.CIT being ITA No: 8581/Mum/2011 for AY. 2008-09 dated 24.02.2016 5) M/s Global Capital Ltd v ACIT being ITA No: 6586/…

Jaswant J Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2599/MUM/2014[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2017AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

Section 127Section 127(3)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…d CIT(A) has computed the disallowance u/s.14A and disallowed Rs.14,75,018/- against the exempt income of Rs.3,08,830/-. In view of the following decisions, disallowance u/s.14A should be restricted to the amount of exempt income. 1) Joint Investments v. CIT [372 ITR 694 (Del)] 2) Indus Valley Investments v. DCIT being ITA NO: 3763/De1/2013 for AY. 2009-10 dated 29.04.2015 3) Essar Properties Ltd v. DCIT (ITA No: 423/Mum/2015) for AY. 2009-10 dated 19.07.2016 4) M/s Slyvex Cable Co. Pvt. Ltd. v Dy.CIT being ITA No: 8581/Mum/2011 for AY. 2008-09 dated 24.02.2016 5) M/s Global Capital Ltd v ACIT being ITA No: 6586/…

Jaswant J Shah, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cen Cir 32, Mumbai

In the result appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 2598/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 May 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm

Section 127Section 127(3)Section 133ASection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 263

…d CIT(A) has computed the disallowance u/s.14A and disallowed Rs.14,75,018/- against the exempt income of Rs.3,08,830/-. In view of the following decisions, disallowance u/s.14A should be restricted to the amount of exempt income. 1) Joint Investments v. CIT [372 ITR 694 (Del)] 2) Indus Valley Investments v. DCIT being ITA NO: 3763/De1/2013 for AY. 2009-10 dated 29.04.2015 3) Essar Properties Ltd v. DCIT (ITA No: 423/Mum/2015) for AY. 2009-10 dated 19.07.2016 4) M/s Slyvex Cable Co. Pvt. Ltd. v Dy.CIT being ITA No: 8581/Mum/2011 for AY. 2008-09 dated 24.02.2016 5) M/s Global Capital Ltd v ACIT being ITA No: 6586/…

The ACIT, 1(1), Bhopal vs. M/S. Sanwaria Agro Oils Limited, Bhopal

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is partly allowed for

ITA 706/IND/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Indore03 May 2017AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri C.M. Garg & Shri O.P. Meena

Section 14ASection 40A(2)Section 40A(2)(b)Section 43B

…wherein it has been held that netting of interest receipts and payments have to be considered. Moreover, the learned counsel for the assessee submitted that on the same issue, the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT; 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) held that “Thus, Section 14A(2) of the Act and Rule 8D(1) in unison and affirmatively record that the computation or disallowance made by the assessee or claim that no expenditure was incurred to earn exempt income must be examined with reference to the accounts, and only and when the explanation/claim of the assessee is not satisfac…

Kamvan Construction P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 3(2)(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 3084/MUM/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai26 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am आमकय अऩीर सं./ I.T.A. No.3084/Mum/2013 (निर्धारण वषा / Assessment Year : 2008-09) M/S Kamvan Construction P.Ltd., Income Tax Officer 3(2)(1), फनाभ/ 403, Maker Bhavan No.3, Aaykar Bhavan, 21, New Marine Lines, M K Road, Vs. Mumbai-400020 Mumbai-400020 Appellant Respondent Pan: Aaack1994L अऩीराथी की ओय से / Appellant By : Shri Anuj Kisnadwala प्रत्मथी की ओय से/Respondent By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav सुनवाई की तायीख /Date Of Hearing : 3.4.2017 घोषणा की तायीख /Date Of : 26.4.2017 Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Per Rajesh Kumar, A. M: This Is An Appeal Filed By The Assessee Challenging The Order Of Ld. Cit(A)-Mumbai, Dated 1.6.2012, Pertaining To The Assessment Year 2008-09. 2. The Only Issue Raised In The Grounds Of Appeal Is Against The Confirmation Of The Disallowance By The Ld. Cit(A) Rs.29,54,392/- As Made By The Ao Under Section 14A Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 R.W.S.8D Of The 2

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 10(23)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…being ITA No: 6586/Del/2013 for AY. 2009-10 dated 27.11.2015 5) DCIT v. DCM Ltd being ITA No: 4467/De1/2012 for AY. 2009-10 dated 01.09.2015 7) Essar Properties Ltd v. DCIT (ITA No: 423/Mum/2015) for AY. 2009- 10 dated 19.07.2016 8) Joint Investments V/s CIT (372 ITR 694) (del) 5. The ld. DR, on the other hand, objected to the arguments advanced by the ld.AR by submitting that the assessee has made huge investments in the mutual funds and shares. Therefore, the disallowance made by the AO and upheld by the ld. CIT(A) deserved to be upheld by heavily relying on the orders of authorities below. 6. We have carefully…

Zoom Entertainment Network Ltd, Mumbai vs. Asst CIT Cir 11(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3453/MUM/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Apr 2017AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2010-11 Zoom Entertainment Acit, Network Limited, Circle-11(1), बनाम/ 1St Floor, Trade Garden Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Kamala Mills Compound Mumbai-400020 Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai-400013 Pan No.Aaacz2897B ("नधा"रती /Assessee) (राज"व /Revenue)

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 14ASection 14A(2)Section 153A

…the case of Baba Global Ltd. vs DCIT (supra), relied upon by ld. DR is concerned, even in that case in para-26, there is categorical finding that the disallowance cannot exceed the exempt income. The ratio laid down in Joint Investment Pvt. Ltd. vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del.) clearly supports the case of the assessee, thus the case relied upon by ld. DR is of not much help to the Revenue. Thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. 14 Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed. This order was pronounced in the open in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing o…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Bharti Infratel Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA No. 4941/Del/2012 is allowed and ITA No

ITA 2823/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 14A

…d income was earned by the assessee in the relevfgant assessment year no disallowance could be made under section 14A of the Act. Further, at the same time in view of the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in 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, as such disallowance of expenditure at Rs. 7,98,28,582/- as against the exempt income of Rs. 52,15,095/- cannot be sustained. We, therefore, direct the AO to limit the disallowance to the tax exempt income. 19. In the result, ITA No. 4941/Del/2012 is…

M/S. Bharti Infratel Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, ITA No. 4941/Del/2012 is allowed and ITA No

ITA 4941/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 14A

…d income was earned by the assessee in the relevfgant assessment year no disallowance could be made under section 14A of the Act. Further, at the same time in view of the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in 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, as such disallowance of expenditure at Rs. 7,98,28,582/- as against the exempt income of Rs. 52,15,095/- cannot be sustained. We, therefore, direct the AO to limit the disallowance to the tax exempt income. 19. In the result, ITA No. 4941/Del/2012 is…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Bharti Infratel Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, ITA No. 4941/Del/2012 is allowed and ITA No

ITA 4736/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal, Hon’Ble & Shri K.N. Charry

Section 14A

…d income was earned by the assessee in the relevfgant assessment year no disallowance could be made under section 14A of the Act. Further, at the same time in view of the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in 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, as such disallowance of expenditure at Rs. 7,98,28,582/- as against the exempt income of Rs. 52,15,095/- cannot be sustained. We, therefore, direct the AO to limit the disallowance to the tax exempt income. 19. In the result, ITA No. 4941/Del/2012 is…

Maestro Ventures P. Ltd, Mumbai vs. DCIT 8(2), Mumbai

ITA 7270/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2011-12
For Appellant: S/Shri Ronak G. Doshi & Manthan Shah-ARsFor Respondent: Shri M.C. Omi Ningshen-DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 254(1)

…आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, , , , मुंबई “ एच” खंडपीठ Income-tax Appellate Tribunal -“H”Bench Mumbai सव"ी सव"ी सव"ी राजे"" सव"ी राजे"" राजे"",लेखा राजे"" लेखा लेखा सद"य लेखा सद"य सद"य एवं सद"य एवं एवं, राम लाल नेगी एवं राम लाल नेगी राम लाल नेगी, "याियक राम लाल नेगी "याियक "याियक सद"य "याियक सद"य सद"य सद"य Before S/Shri Rajendra,Accountant Member and Ram Lal Negi,Judicial Member आयकर आयकर अपील आयकर आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./I.T.A./7270/Mum/2014, िनधा"रण अपील िनधा"रण िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2011-12 वष" Maestro Ventures Pvt.Ltd. DCIT, Range-8(2) (Now merged with Yuvak Ventures 2nd Floor, Aayakar Bhava…

Reliance Infrastructure and Consultants Ltd ( Erstwhile Reliance Infrastructure Ltd), Mumbai vs. Asst CIT RG 10(1), Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of revenue also allowed

ITA 6452/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Tax- M/S Rel Utility Engineers Ltd, -Range-10(1), (Erstwhile M/S Reliance Room No.455, Aaykar Bhavan, Infrastructure & Consultants फनधभ/ M K Road, Near Churchgate, Ltd, Devidas Lane, Mumbai-400020 Vs. Near Mtnl, Off Svp Road, Borivali (W)- Mumbai-400103 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : M/S Rel Utility Engineers Ltd, Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Tax- -Range-10(1), (Erstwhile Reliance Room No.455, Aaykar Bhavan, Infrastructure & Consultants फनधभ/ M K Road, Near Churchgate, Ltd, Devidas Lane, Mumbai-400020 Vs. Near Mtnl, Off Svp Road, Borivali (W)-400103. स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaccr7678G (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 115JSection 14A

…nts of the High Courts and Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the amount of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.s.Rule 8D should not exceed the amount of exempt income. In defense of his arguments, the ld.AR relied upon the following decisions: 1) Joint Investments V/s CIT (372 ITR 694) (del) 2) Mls Daga Global Chemicals v. Asst. CIT being ITA No:5592/Mum/2012 dated 01.01.2015 3) M/s. Pinnacle Brocom Pvt. V/s ACIT I.T.A. No. 6247/Mum/2012 28th January, 2014 4) Mitsubishi Corporation India (P) Ltd V./s DCIT 11 and 6452/M/2011 (2015) (64 Taxmann.com 338)(Delhi)(Tribunal) 5) John Distilleries Ltd V/s DCIT (ITA No.1429/Bang/20…

DCIT 10(1), Mumbai vs. Reliance Infrastructure and Consultants Ltd, Mumbai

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed and that of revenue also allowed

ITA 6266/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Tax- M/S Rel Utility Engineers Ltd, -Range-10(1), (Erstwhile M/S Reliance Room No.455, Aaykar Bhavan, Infrastructure & Consultants फनधभ/ M K Road, Near Churchgate, Ltd, Devidas Lane, Mumbai-400020 Vs. Near Mtnl, Off Svp Road, Borivali (W)- Mumbai-400103 (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) : M/S Rel Utility Engineers Ltd, Asstt.Commissioner Of Income Tax- -Range-10(1), (Erstwhile Reliance Room No.455, Aaykar Bhavan, Infrastructure & Consultants फनधभ/ M K Road, Near Churchgate, Ltd, Devidas Lane, Mumbai-400020 Vs. Near Mtnl, Off Svp Road, Borivali (W)-400103. स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaccr7678G (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :

For Appellant: Shri Jitendra SanghviFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Mittal
Section 115JSection 14A

…nts of the High Courts and Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, the amount of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.s.Rule 8D should not exceed the amount of exempt income. In defense of his arguments, the ld.AR relied upon the following decisions: 1) Joint Investments V/s CIT (372 ITR 694) (del) 2) Mls Daga Global Chemicals v. Asst. CIT being ITA No:5592/Mum/2012 dated 01.01.2015 3) M/s. Pinnacle Brocom Pvt. V/s ACIT I.T.A. No. 6247/Mum/2012 28th January, 2014 4) Mitsubishi Corporation India (P) Ltd V./s DCIT 11 and 6452/M/2011 (2015) (64 Taxmann.com 338)(Delhi)(Tribunal) 5) John Distilleries Ltd V/s DCIT (ITA No.1429/Bang/20…

DCIT Cen Cir 4(1), Mumbai vs. Godawari Corporation Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4396/MUM/2016[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Apr 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri Mahavir Singh, Jm & Sri Ramit Kochar, Am Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, M/S Godavari Corporation Central Circle-4(1), Ltd. R. No. 1916, 19Th Floor, Air Vs. Industry House, 159, Backbay India Building, Nariman Point, Reclamation, Churchgate, Mumbai-400 021 Mumbai-400 020 Appellant .. Respondent Pan No. Aaacg1850D Revenue By .. Shri Sunil Kumar Agarwal, Dr Assessee By .. Miss Aarti Vissanji, Ar Date Of Hearing .. 10-04-2017 Date Of Pronouncement .. 10-04-2017 O R D E R Per Mahavir Singh, Jm:

Section 115ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…sions of book profit under section 115JB of the act to the extent of exempt dividend income claimed by assessee at Rs. 25,18,274/-. For this the CIT(A) relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment P. Ltd v. CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (del) : - “7.During the course of hearing, counsel for the petitioner had relied upon a decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax VI v. Taikisha Engineering India Ltd., (ITA 115/2014, decided on 25.11.2014). The Page 2 of 5 M/s Godavari Corporation Ltd. AY:09-10 court had, in that judgment, highlighted the necessity in view of the pec…

Ameer Trading Corporation Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 2(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 7731/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं././././Ita No.7731/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" M/S. Ameer Trading Ito 2(1)(1), Corporation Limited, Aayakar Bhavan, 310B, Veer Savarkar Marg, बनाम/Vs. Mumbai बनाम बनाम बनाम Dadar (W), Mumbai-400 028 Pan: Aabca 0761A (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'यथ% &'यथ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'यथ% &'यथ% Present For: Assessee By : None Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R.

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 14Section 14A

…ide order dated 24.03.2014 and by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of “CIT vs. M/s. Delite Enterprises” in ITA No.110 of 2009 vide order dated 26.02.09. Further, the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Private Limited reported in 372 ITR 694 has held that section 14 of the Act or rule 8D cannot be interpreted so as to mean that the entire tax exempt income of the assessee is to be disallowed. That the window for disallowance is indicated in Section 14A, and is only to the extent of disallowing expenditure incurred by the assessee in relation to the tax exempt income. This proportion…

DCIT 8(3)(1), Mumbai vs. Urban Infrastructure Holding P.Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1979/MUM/2015[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai31 Mar 2017AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.C.Sharma, Am & Shri Sandeep Gosain, Jm Dcit- 8(3)(1), Mumbai – Vs. Urban Infrastructure Holding Pvt. Ltd., 1St Floor, 400 020 Jai Centre, 34 Pd Mello Road, Opp. Rd Gate, Masjid – 400 009 Pan/Gir No. Aajcs2680L Appellant) .. Respondent)

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14aSection 36Section 36(1)(iii)

…essee was not in doubt, no disallowance could be made u/s.14A. 8. Furthermore, the proposition that no disallowance can be made u/s.14A in case there is no exempt income is also supported by the following judicial pronouncements. 1. Joint Investments v. CIT (372 ITR 694 (Del) 2. Indus Valley Investments v DCIT being ITA No.3763/Del/2013 for A.Y.2009-10 dated 29/04/2015 3. M/s. Daga Global Chemicals vs. Asst. CIT being ITA No.5592/Mum/2012 dated 01/01/2015. 4. M/s. Slyvex Cable Co. Pvt. Ltd., v Dy. CIT being ITA No.8581/Mum/2011 for A.Y.2008-09 dated 24/02/2016. 9. It is not in dispute that assessee was not in re…

Lakhani Shoee Co. Pvt. Ltd vs. ACIT, Alwar

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 854/JPR/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur20 Feb 2017AY 2012-13
For Appellant: Shri S.C. Vasudeva (C.A)For Respondent: Shri S.L. Chandel (Addl.CIT)
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपीलीय अधिकरण] जयपुर न्यायपीठ] जयपुर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR Jh dqy Hkkjr] U;kf;d lnL; ,oa Jh foØe flag ;kno] ys[kk lnL; ds le{k BEFORE: SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM & SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM vk;dj vihy la-@ITA No. 854/JP/2016 fu/kZkj.k o"kZ@Assessment Year : 2012-13. cuke M/s Lakhani Shoe Co. Pvt. Ltd. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vs. Plot No. 130, Sector-24, Circle-2, Faridabad – 121005 Alwar. LFkk;h ys[kk la-@thvkbZvkj la-@PAN No. AAACL 2991 A vihykFkhZ@Appellant izR;FkhZ@Respondent fu/kZkfjrh dh vksj ls@ Assessee by : Shri S.C. Vasudeva (C.A) jktLo dh vksj ls@ Revenu…

Aarti Drugs Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 6(1), Mumbai

ITA 6783/MUM/2014[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2011-12

Bench: S/Shri Rajendra, A.M. & Sanjay Garg,J.M. आयकर अपील अपील संसंसंसं./Ita No. 6783-84/Mum/2014,िनधा" रण वष" वष" /Assessment Year: 2010-11 & 2011-12 आयकर िनधा"रण आयकर आयकर अपील अपील िनधा" िनधा" रण रण वष" वष" Aarti Drugs Limited Addl. Cit, Range-6(1) Plot No.109, ‘D’ 3Rd Floor, Mahendra Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai. Vs. Indl Estate.Sion(E), Mumbai-400 022. Pan: Aaaca 4410 D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) (""यथ" / Respondent) Revenue By: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav Assessee By: Shri Anuj Kisnadwala सुनवाई क" तारीख / Date Of Hearing: 18.01.2017 घोषणा क" तारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 10 .02.2017 आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम,1961 क" क" धारा धारा 254(1)केकेकेके अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश आयकर आयकर आयकर अिधिनयम अिधिनयम क" क" धारा धारा अ"तग"त अ"तग"त आदेश आदेश Order U/S.254(1)Of The Income-Tax Act,1961(Act)

For Appellant: Shri Anuj KisnadwalaFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav
Section 10Section 14Section 14ASection 254(1)

…er appeal amounted to Rs.1, 41, 09, 15, 920/-and that assessee had made investment of Rs. 21.37crores, that it had earned exempt income of Rs.50,944/-. He relied upon the cases of Reliance Utilities Ltd(313ITR340),HDFC Bank Ltd.(366 ITR 505) Joint Investments(372 ITR 694)ACB India(374 ITR 108) Cheminvest Ltd. (378 ITR 33).The Departmental Representative (DR) supported the order of the FAA. 2.3.We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material before us. We find that during the year under consideration the assessee had claimed exemption of Rs.50,944/-u/s.10 (34) of the Act, that it had made a disallowa…

ITO, WD-4(4), Kolkata vs. M/S Tea Promoters (India), Pvt. Ltd., Kolkata

In the result ITA No.625 and 711/Kol/2014 are dismissed and ITA Nos

ITA 625/KOL/2014[2006-2007]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Feb 2017AY 2006-2007

Bench: Hon’Ble Sri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Dr.Arjun Lal Saini, Am] I.T.A Nos.625 To 627&711/Kol/2014 Assessment Years : 2006-07, 2008-09, 2009-10 & 2007-08

For Appellant: Shri S.Venkatramani, Addl. CIT, Sr.DRFor Respondent: Ms.Arti Debnath, CA & Shri Shital Khemka, CA
Section 10BSection 14A

…hat the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act cannot be more than the exempt income earned by the assessee. The ld. Counsel also placed reliance on the identical proposition laid down by the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. Vs CIT 372 ITR 694 (Delhi). 6. We have considered the submissions of the ld. Counsel for the assessee and are of the view that it would be just and appropriate to sustain the disallowance of expenses u/s 14A r.w. 8D(2)(iii) of the Rules to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee during the previous year namely a sum of Rs.88,350/- in A.Y.2008-09 and a su…