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

Bajaj Finance Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 8, Pune

ITA 767/PUN/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala and Ms. Vasanti B. Patel
Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

…ion to the corresponding exempt income(s) of Rs.42,964/- and Rs.42,911/-; respectively. Suffice to say, the assessee had suo motu disallowed Rs.50,000/- each in both the assessment years. Faced with this situation, we quote Joint Investment Vs. ACIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) that such a disallowance ought not to exceed the corresponding exempt income itself. The fact also remains that the assessee’s suo motu disallowance of Rs.50,000/- already exceeds the sum which has nowhere been contested during the course of hearing. We, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the impugned section 14A read…

Bajaj Finance Ltd, Pune vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 8, Pune

ITA 766/PUN/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune09 Dec 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S.S. Godara & Dr. Dipak P. Ripote

For Appellant: Shri Percy Pardiwala and Ms. Vasanti B. Patel
Section 14ASection 37Section 37(1)

…ion to the corresponding exempt income(s) of Rs.42,964/- and Rs.42,911/-; respectively. Suffice to say, the assessee had suo motu disallowed Rs.50,000/- each in both the assessment years. Faced with this situation, we quote Joint Investment Vs. ACIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) that such a disallowance ought not to exceed the corresponding exempt income itself. The fact also remains that the assessee’s suo motu disallowance of Rs.50,000/- already exceeds the sum which has nowhere been contested during the course of hearing. We, therefore, direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the impugned section 14A read…

Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(4), Bangalore vs. Century Real Estate Holdings Private Limited, Bangalore

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

ITA 740/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar, D.R

…ITA No.580 & 740/Bang/2022 M/s. Century Real Estate Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Century Real Estate Holdings Pvt. Ltd. No.10/1, Ground Floor, Deputy Commissioner of Lakshminarayana Complex, Income-tax Palace Road Vs. Central Circle-2(2) Vasanth Nagar Bangalore Bangalore 560 052 PAN NO : AADCC0651M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Century Real Estate Income-tax Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central…

Century Real Estate Holdings Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-2(2), Bangalore

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

ITA 580/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Nov 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2013-14

For Appellant: Smt. Sheetal Borkar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Gudimella V.P. Pavan Kumar, D.R

…ITA No.580 & 740/Bang/2022 M/s. Century Real Estate Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 M/s. Century Real Estate Holdings Pvt. Ltd. No.10/1, Ground Floor, Deputy Commissioner of Lakshminarayana Complex, Income-tax Palace Road Vs. Central Circle-2(2) Vasanth Nagar Bangalore Bangalore 560 052 PAN NO : AADCC0651M APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessment Year: 2013-14 Deputy Commissioner of M/s. Century Real Estate Income-tax Holdings Pvt. Ltd. Vs. Central…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-7 vs. Tulip Telecom Ltd

ITA - 484 / 2022HC Delhi24 Nov 2022
Section 14A

…$~S-47 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 484/2022 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-7 ..... Appellant Through: Mr.Puneet Rai, Sr.Standing Counsel with Ms.Adeeba Mujahid, Jr.Standing Counsel and Mr.Nikhil Jain, Advocate. versus TULIP TELECOM LTD. ..... Respondent Through: None. CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANMOHAN HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MANMEET PRITAM SINGH ARORA O R D E R % 24.11.2022 CM APPL.50604/2022 Keeping in view the averments in the application, the delay in filing the appeal is condoned. Accordingly, the application stands disposed of. ITA 484/2022 Present Income Tax Appeal has been filed challengi…

Sapphire Land Developemnt P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ACIT Cen Cir 5(4), Mumbai

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 5308/MUM/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kuldip Singh () & Shri Amarjit Singh ()

Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 8D(2)(iii)

…ce under section 14A r.w.r. 8D cannot exceed the exempt income and also placed reliance on the decision of ITAT, Mumbai Bench in Daga Global Chemicals Pvt Ltd vs ACIT ITA No.5592/Mum/2012 and Hon’ble Delhi High Court in Joint Investments Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del). 3.2 After considering the above facts, we observe that now it is settled on the basis of various decision of different courts that disallowance under section 8D(2)(iii) of the Act cannot exceed exempt income. Accordingly, we direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance to the extent of exempt income earned by the assessee afte…

M/S United Breweries Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(1)(1), Bangalore

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

ITA 481/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore11 Nov 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri George George K, Jm & Ms.Padmavathy S, Am

For Appellant: Sri.K.R.Vasudevan, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sri.K.Sankar Ganesh, JCIT –DR
Section 115JSection 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 40Section 43B

…ettled position of law that disallowance cannot exceed the amount of dividend income earned during the relevant assessment year. In this context, the following judicial pronouncements support the stand of the assessee:- (i) Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (59 Taxmann.com 295)– it was held that disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is to be restricted to the tax exempt income. (ii) Daga Global Chemicals Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT [2015-ITRVITAT-MUM-123) – has held that disallowance u/s 14A r.w. Rule 8D cannot exceed the exempt income. (iii) M/s.Pinnacle Brocom Pvt. Ltd. v. ACIT (ITA No.6247/M/2012) – has held that disallowanc…

Hexa Securities & Finance Company Limited., New Delhi vs. DCIT Circle-11(1), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical

ITA 1124/DEL/2020[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Nov 2022AY 2015-16
For Appellant: Shri Anil Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Rajendra Jha, Sr. DR
Section 14A

…. As regards the alternative submission that disallowance should be restricted to the exempt income earned, ld. Counsel for the assessee placed reliance upon the decision of Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT 372 ITR 694 (Del.). On a query from the Bench about the applicability of Hon’ble Supreme Court decision in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. – (2006) 284 ITR 323 (SC), ld. Counsel stated that the said decision was only applicable to the AO but not to ld. CIT (A). 7. Upon hearing both the parties and perusing the records, we find that Hon’ble Apex Court in…

M/S M/S Nav Bharat Press, Raipur (Cg) vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax 3(1), Raipur (Cg)

In the result, appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 6/BIL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood, Jm & Shri Arun Khodpia, Am आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.06/Rpr/2017 & आयकर अऩीऱ सं./Ita No.162/Rpr/2019 (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2013-2014 & 2015-2016) M/S Nava Bharat Press, Vs Acit, Cirlce-3(1), Raipur Press Complex, G.E.Road, Raipur (C.G.) Pan No. : Aadfn 0350 R (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ..

For Appellant: Shri Mahavir Atal & Shri Sudhir Baheti, CAsFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 36Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(va)

…een rejected by Hon. Apex Court on 3rd May, 2019 as reported in PCIT Vs. GVK Projects & Technical Services Ltd [2019] 106 Taxmann.com 180 ( Delhi)/ [2019]264 Taxmann 76 (SC). 4. The Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments P Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Delhi) held 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 tax exempt income. This proportion or portion of the tax exempt income surely cannot swallow the entire amount as has happened in this case. We further notice that the Hon‟ble Delhi…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Rswm Ltd, Kharigram

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1927/DEL/2020[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, CIT-DR
Section 10(34)Section 14Section 14ASection 153A

…ernate plea I.T.A. No.1927/Del/2020 3 raised by the AR that disallowance u/s 14A should be restricted to the extent of exempt income which is supported from decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Private Limited vs. CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Del) and Pr.CIT v. Caraf Builders 8b Constructions (P.) Ltd. [2019] 414 ITR 122 (Delhi) [SLP dismissed by SC]. 8.3 In view of finding recorded in aforesaid para, I hereby direct the Assessing Officer to restrict the disallowance to the extent of dividend income of Rs.50,17,110/- and delete remaining disallowance. The Ground No.1 is thus partly a…

DCIT Central Circle-31, New Delhi vs. Rswm Ltd, Kharigram

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1926/DEL/2020[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Oct 2022AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Kul Bharat & Shri Pradip Kumar Kedia

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Shri R.K. Gupta, CIT-DR
Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 153A

…m inclined to agree with alternate plea raised by the AR that disallowance u/s 14A should be restricted to the extent of exempt income which is supported from decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investments Private Limited vs. CIT [2015] 372 ITR 694 (Del) and Pr.CIT v. Caraf Builders & Constructions (P.) Ltd. [2019] 414 ITR 122 (Delhi) [SLP dismissed by SC] 8.3 In view of finding recorded in aforesaid para, I hereby direct the assessing officer to restrict the disallowance to the extent of dividend income of Rs. 1,48,52,682/- and delete the remaining disallowance. The Ground No. 1 is thus pa…

DCIT -CC- 8(4), Mumbai vs. Bermaco Energy System Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3752/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 44A

…de any disallowance under section 14A in the return of income for the reason that no expenses are incurred for earning the exempt income. The assessee has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) which has held that the disallowance under section 14A is restricted only to the disallowance of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to exempt income. The assessee has also relied on various other decisions, which are as follows:- (1)M/s John Distilleries Ltd vs ITO ITA No.1429/Bang/2014 order dt 24 February, 2016 (2) M/s Global C…

DCIT -CC- 8(4), Mumbai vs. Bermaco Energy System Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3751/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 44A

…de any disallowance under section 14A in the return of income for the reason that no expenses are incurred for earning the exempt income. The assessee has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) which has held that the disallowance under section 14A is restricted only to the disallowance of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to exempt income. The assessee has also relied on various other decisions, which are as follows:- (1)M/s John Distilleries Ltd vs ITO ITA No.1429/Bang/2014 order dt 24 February, 2016 (2) M/s Global C…

DCIT - CC - 8(4), Mumbai vs. Bermaco Energy System Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3750/MUM/2018[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2010-11

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 44A

…de any disallowance under section 14A in the return of income for the reason that no expenses are incurred for earning the exempt income. The assessee has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) which has held that the disallowance under section 14A is restricted only to the disallowance of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to exempt income. The assessee has also relied on various other decisions, which are as follows:- (1)M/s John Distilleries Ltd vs ITO ITA No.1429/Bang/2014 order dt 24 February, 2016 (2) M/s Global C…

DCIT -CC -8 (4), Mumbai vs. Bermaco Energy System Ltd., Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 3749/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 44A

…de any disallowance under section 14A in the return of income for the reason that no expenses are incurred for earning the exempt income. The assessee has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) which has held that the disallowance under section 14A is restricted only to the disallowance of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to exempt income. The assessee has also relied on various other decisions, which are as follows:- (1)M/s John Distilleries Ltd vs ITO ITA No.1429/Bang/2014 order dt 24 February, 2016 (2) M/s Global C…

Bermaco Energy System Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT, CC- 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2854/MUM/2018[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 44A

…de any disallowance under section 14A in the return of income for the reason that no expenses are incurred for earning the exempt income. The assessee has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) which has held that the disallowance under section 14A is restricted only to the disallowance of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to exempt income. The assessee has also relied on various other decisions, which are as follows:- (1)M/s John Distilleries Ltd vs ITO ITA No.1429/Bang/2014 order dt 24 February, 2016 (2) M/s Global C…

Bermaco Energy System Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT - CC- 47, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2853/MUM/2018[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 44A

…de any disallowance under section 14A in the return of income for the reason that no expenses are incurred for earning the exempt income. The assessee has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) which has held that the disallowance under section 14A is restricted only to the disallowance of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to exempt income. The assessee has also relied on various other decisions, which are as follows:- (1)M/s John Distilleries Ltd vs ITO ITA No.1429/Bang/2014 order dt 24 February, 2016 (2) M/s Global C…

Bermaco Energy System Limited, Mumbai vs. DCIT- CC-47 Mumbai, Mumbai

In the result, appeals filed by the Revenue are dismissed and the appeals filed by the assessee are dismissed

ITA 2852/MUM/2018[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai30 Sept 2022AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri B.R. Baskaran () & Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal ()

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 153ASection 250Section 44A

…de any disallowance under section 14A in the return of income for the reason that no expenses are incurred for earning the exempt income. The assessee has relied on the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Joint Investment Pvt Ltd vs CIT (2015) 372 ITR 694 (Del) which has held that the disallowance under section 14A is restricted only to the disallowance of expenses incurred by the assessee in relation to exempt income. The assessee has also relied on various other decisions, which are as follows:- (1)M/s John Distilleries Ltd vs ITO ITA No.1429/Bang/2014 order dt 24 February, 2016 (2) M/s Global C…

Dhumal Industries, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 994/PUN/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.993 & 994/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dhumal Industries, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Nashik. E-36, D Road, Midc, Satpur, Nashik- 422007. Pan : Aacfd0528N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 07.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Nashik [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 08.05.2019 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.993/Pun/2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ering the value of those investments, which yielded the exempt income alone for the purpose of arriving at average value of investments, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, 374 ITR 694 (Delhi), the decisions of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the cases of ACB India Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Marg Ltd. Vs. CIT, 318 CTR (Mad.) 148 and CIT Vs. Shriram Ownership Trust 318 CTR (Mad.) 233 and also by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank Vs. Jt.CIT, 95 Taxman.com 41 (Kar.). Thus…

Dhumal Industries, Nashik vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax, Circle - 1, Nashik

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA

ITA 993/PUN/2019[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Pune26 Sept 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri S. S. Godara & Shri Inturi Rama Raoआयकर अपील सं. / Ita Nos.993 & 994/Pun/2019 िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2012-13 & 2013-14 Dhumal Industries, Vs. Dcit, Circle-1, Nashik. E-36, D Road, Midc, Satpur, Nashik- 422007. Pan : Aacfd0528N Appellant Respondent Assessee By : Shri Pramod S. Shingte Revenue By : Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde Date Of Hearing : 07.09.2022 Date Of Pronouncement : 26.09.2022 आदेश / Order Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am: These Are The Appeals Filed By The Assessee Directed Against The Separate Orders Of Ld. Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)- 1, Nashik [‘The Cit(A)’] Dated 08.05.2019 For The Assessment Years 2012-13 & 2013-14 Respectively. 2. Since The Identical Facts & Common Issues Are Involved In Both The Above Captioned Appeals, We Proceed To Dispose Of The Same By This Common Order. 3. For The Sake Of Convenience & Clarity, The Facts Relevant To The Appeal In Ita No.993/Pun/2019 For The Assessment Year 2012-13 Are Stated Herein.

For Appellant: Shri Pramod S. ShingteFor Respondent: Shri Ramnath P. Murkunde
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ering the value of those investments, which yielded the exempt income alone for the purpose of arriving at average value of investments, in view of the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of in the case of Joint Investments Pvt. Ltd. vs. CIT, 374 ITR 694 (Delhi), the decisions of Hon’ble Madras High Court in the cases of ACB India Ltd. Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Marg Ltd. Vs. CIT, 318 CTR (Mad.) 148 and CIT Vs. Shriram Ownership Trust 318 CTR (Mad.) 233 and also by the Hon’ble Karnataka High Court in the case of Pragathi Krishna Gramin Bank Vs. Jt.CIT, 95 Taxman.com 41 (Kar.). Thus…