Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

50 SOT 102Income Tax Appellate Tribunal2012#3487 most cited

What is Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT authority for?

Section 14A aims to prevent the claiming of deductions for expenses incurred in relation to tax-exempt income, and a narrow interpretation that defeats this purpose is incorrect. The concept of 'real income' must be considered, as taxation of 'notional income' is not permissible.

34

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT · 50 SOT 102 · Section 14A · Section 14A(1) · Section 14A(2) · Section 14A(3) · Rule 8D · real income · notional income · expenses incurred in relation to exempt income

Sections most often in play

Section 115JBSection 14ASection 92CA(3)Section 37(1)Section 250Section 80GSection 143(3)Section 37

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(3)section 14a(1)section 43asection 57(iii)strategic investmentprohibited by lawsection 14a(2)section 254(2)right to receivesection 10(34)interest on securitiescredit for tds

Judgments citing Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT

DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Coal India Ltd., Kolkata

ITA 1697/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…p the cause of assessee. The assessee relied upon the decision of various courts of law listed as under: (i) Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs CIT347ITR 272 (Del) (ii) Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom) (iii) Relaxo Footwears Ltd. Vs Addl.CIT (2012) 50 SOT 102 (iv) REI Agro Ltd. Kolkata vs D CIT ITA No.1331/Kol/2011 (v) DCIT vs Ashish Jhunjhunwala In all of the aforesaid judgements, the ratio was that the AO failed to record any satisfaction u/s 14A read with rule 8D whereas in the present case proper satisfaction was recorded by the AO u/s 14A of the Act. Reliance was placed on the judgments rendered i…

M/S Coal India Ltd., Kolkata vs. DCIT, Cir-5(1), Kolkata

ITA 1407/KOL/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 1Section 115JSection 250

…p the cause of assessee. The assessee relied upon the decision of various courts of law listed as under: (i) Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs CIT347ITR 272 (Del) (ii) Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom) (iii) Relaxo Footwears Ltd. Vs Addl.CIT (2012) 50 SOT 102 (iv) REI Agro Ltd. Kolkata vs D CIT ITA No.1331/Kol/2011 (v) DCIT vs Ashish Jhunjhunwala In all of the aforesaid judgements, the ratio was that the AO failed to record any satisfaction u/s 14A read with rule 8D whereas in the present case proper satisfaction was recorded by the AO u/s 14A of the Act. Reliance was placed on the judgments rendered i…

DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Coal India Limited, Kolkata

ITA 623/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13
Section 115JSection 250

…p the cause of assessee. The assessee relied upon the decision of various courts of law listed as under: (i) Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs CIT347ITR 272 (Del) (ii) Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom) (iii) Relaxo Footwears Ltd. Vs Addl.CIT (2012) 50 SOT 102 (iv) REI Agro Ltd. Kolkata vs D CIT ITA No.1331/Kol/2011 (v) DCIT vs Ashish Jhunjhunwala In all of the aforesaid judgements, the ratio was that the AO failed to record any satisfaction u/s 14A read with rule 8D whereas in the present case proper satisfaction was recorded by the AO u/s 14A of the Act. Reliance was placed on the judgments rendered i…

DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata vs. M/S. Coal India Limited, Kolkata

ITA 622/KOL/2018[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…p the cause of assessee. The assessee relied upon the decision of various courts of law listed as under: (i) Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs CIT347ITR 272 (Del) (ii) Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom) (iii) Relaxo Footwears Ltd. Vs Addl.CIT (2012) 50 SOT 102 (iv) REI Agro Ltd. Kolkata vs D CIT ITA No.1331/Kol/2011 (v) DCIT vs Ashish Jhunjhunwala In all of the aforesaid judgements, the ratio was that the AO failed to record any satisfaction u/s 14A read with rule 8D whereas in the present case proper satisfaction was recorded by the AO u/s 14A of the Act. Reliance was placed on the judgments rendered i…

Coal India Limited, Kolkata vs. DCIT, Circle - 5(1), Kolkata

ITA 467/KOL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata20 Jan 2026AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Pradip Kumar Choubey & Shri Rakesh Mishra

Section 115JSection 250

…p the cause of assessee. The assessee relied upon the decision of various courts of law listed as under: (i) Maxopp Investments Ltd. Vs CIT347ITR 272 (Del) (ii) Godrej & Boyce Mfg.Co.Ltd. vs DCIT 328 ITR 81 (Bom) (iii) Relaxo Footwears Ltd. Vs Addl.CIT (2012) 50 SOT 102 (iv) REI Agro Ltd. Kolkata vs D CIT ITA No.1331/Kol/2011 (v) DCIT vs Ashish Jhunjhunwala In all of the aforesaid judgements, the ratio was that the AO failed to record any satisfaction u/s 14A read with rule 8D whereas in the present case proper satisfaction was recorded by the AO u/s 14A of the Act. Reliance was placed on the judgments rendered i…

Thrrill Park Limited, Mumbai vs. Commissioner of Income Tax -Appeals, Delhi

ITA 316/MUM/2024[2018-2019]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai27 May 2024AY 2018-2019
Section 10(35)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…he above CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression‘such previous year'. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income'. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘not…

Pradipta Kumar Parida DCIT321, Mumbai vs. Kail Limited, Mumbai

ITA 4669/MUM/2023[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 May 2024AY 2014-15
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…he above CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX XXX 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression‘such previous year'. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income'. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘not…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 1(1), Raipur vs. Mesers Vandana Ispat Limited, Raipur

In the result, the appeal of revenue is dismissed

ITA 183/RPR/2019[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur31 Oct 2022AY 2013-14
For Appellant: Shri R.B.Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri G.N.Singh, Sr. DR
Section 68

…earn exempt income for making disallowance u/s 14A and the similar decision has also held in the cases of (i) Sira Industries & Holding Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 54 SOT 49(Chen), (ii) Technopark Advisory Pvt. Ltd (2012) 50 SOT 31(Del), (iii) Relaxo Footwear Ltd (2012) 50 SOT 102 (Del) and (iv) India Infrastructure Developers Ltd (2009) 121 ITD 315 (Del)? 23. “Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition by ignoring the; circular no. 05/2014 dated 11.02.2014 issued by CBDT wherein it has been clarified that the disallowance u/s 14A is applicable ev…

Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle -1(1), Raipur vs. M/S R.N. Navnirman Private Limited, Raipur

ITA 143/RPR/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Raipur23 Sept 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Ravish Sood & Shri Arun Khodpiaआयकर अपील सं. / Ita No.143/Rpr/2018 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2014-15 The Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax-1(1), Raipur (C.G.) .......अपीलाथ" / Appellant बनाम / V/S. M/S. R.N. Navnirman Pvt. Ltd. Vandana Building, Raipur (C.G.) Pan : Aadcr0896D ……""यथ" / Respondent Assessee By :Shri R.B Doshi, Ca Revenue By :Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri R.B Doshi, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Kumar, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 14A(3)Section 250(4)Section 68

…d the similar decision has also held in the 4 ACIT, Circle-1(1) Vs. M/s. R.N Navnirman Pvt. Ltd. cases of (i) Sira Industries & Holding Pvt. Ltd. (2012) 54 SOT 49(Chen), (ii) Technopark Advisory Pvt. Ltd (2012) 50 SOT 31(Del), (iii) Relaxo Footwear Ltd (2012) 50 SOT 102 (Del) and (iv) India Infrastructure Developers Ltd (2009) 121 ITD 315 (Del)? 12. "Whether on points of law and on facts & circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was justified in deleting the addition by ignoring the circular no. 05/2014 dated 11.02.2014 issued by CBDT wherein it has been clarified that the disallowance u/s 14A is applicable eve…

Victory Electricals Limited, Medchal, R.R.Dist vs. DCIT, Circle-17(2), Hyderabad

The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 738/HYD/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Hyderabad14 Jul 2022AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Rama Kanta Panda & Shri Laliet Kumarassessment Year: 2012-13 Victory Electricals Ltd., V Dcit,Circle-17(2) Plot No.8, Survey No.855, S. Signature Towers Ida, Medchal, Kondapur Ranga Reddy, Hyderabad Hyderabad-501 401

For Appellant: Shri S.Rama Rao, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Dr.Rajendra Kumar,CIT-DR
Section 14ASection 32(2)Section 36Section 36(1)(vii)

…se cases will apply mutatis mutandis under sec. 14A of the Act also while ascertaining the expenditure incurred for earning tax-free income from investment [Technopak Advisors (P.) Ltd [2012) 50 SOT 31 (Delhi) para 3, Relaxo footwears ltd. V. Addl. CIT (2012) 50 SOT 102 (Delhi) and Cheminvest Ltd. v. Income-Tax Officer [2009] 121 ITD 318 (DELHI)(SB) followed). 6.7 For an example the interest paid on borrowings for the purchase of shares is treated as allowable under section 57 as an expenditure incurred for earning or making income or under section 36( 1) (iii) as an expenditure incurred wholly and exclusively f…

M/S Karnataka State Beverages Corporation Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-4(1)(1), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is dismissed

ITA 973/BANG/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore09 Dec 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri George George K.Assessment Year : 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri S.V. Ravishankar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Chetan R., Addl. CIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru
Section 14A

…rigors of Rule 8D, despite having not found anything in the accounts of the assessee to suggest that expenditure was indeed incurred by the assessee. Page 4 of 12 6. Reliance is placed on the following decisions:- • Relaxo Footwears Ltd. v. ACIT reported in 50 SOT 102 (Delhi); • Priya Exhibitors (P) Ltd. v. ACIT reported in 54 SOT 356 (Delhi); • DCIT vs. Ashish Jhunjhunwala- ITA No.1890/Ko1/2012 (Kolkata Bench ITAT); • Kalyani Steels Ltd. v. Addl.CIT - ITA No.1733/PN/2012 (Pune Bench-B, ITAT); • REI Agro Ltd., v. DCIT reported in 160 TTJ 107 (Kolkata); • ACIT v. Magarpatta Township Development & Construction Co…

Ravi Goenka, Mumbai vs. ACIT 17(3), Mumbai

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

ITA 5132/MUM/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai05 Oct 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Mahavir Singh () & Shri S. Rifaur Rahman () Assessment Year: 2013-14 Mr. Ravi Goenka, Asst. Commissioner Of Income Tax, 15, Shirin Chambers, 348/50, Vs. Circle 17(3), Samuel Street, Vadgadi, Room No. 137, 1St Floor, Mumbai-400 003. Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Road, Mumbai-400020. Pan No. Aacpg 9107 E Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Mr. Shekhar Gupta, ARFor Respondent: Mr. Bharat Andhale, DR
Section 10Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…ouncements upholding the applicability of section 14A in respect of dividend income. Few of them are quoted below-  Smt. Leena Ramachandran [(2011) 339 ITR 296 (Ker)]  Technopack Advisors P Ltd [(2012) 50 SOT 31 (Delhi)(URO)]  Relaxo Footwear Ltd [ (2012) 50 SOT 102 (Delhi)]  Cheminvest Ltd {121 ITD 318 2009 (DEL)]  Yogesh J Shah [(2010)(46 SOT 183) (Mum) (URO] Therefore, in the light of the above discussion the undersigned is satisfied as per section 14A (3) that the expenditure in relation to the exempt income has not been correctly disallowed by the assessee and it is to be disallowed as per Rule 8D. F…

Dhanuka Labs Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, miscellaneous application as well as the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3898/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Jul 2021AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Respondent: Ms. Aman Preet, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 14A(3)

…he above CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression ‘such previous year’. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income’. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘…

ACIT, Central Circle- 17, New Delhi vs. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 798/DEL/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None
Section 14A

…he above CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression ‘such previous year’. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income’. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘…

ACIT, Central Circle- 17, New Delhi vs. Era Infrastructure (India) Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 797/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Chary

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: None
Section 14A

…he above CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression ‘such previous year’. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income’. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘…

ACIT, Circle- 7(2), Delhi vs. Ds Group Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5483/DEL/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2015-16 Acit, Circle-7(2), Delhi Vs. M/S Ds Group Hospitality Pvt. Ltd., 3Rd Floor, Sco No. 310, Ansari Road, Daryaganj, New Delhi-110002 Pan-Aaecd7010Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By : Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Respondent By : Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Date Of Hearing : 10.03.2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 10.03.2021 Order Per K. Narasimha Chary, Jm: Aggrieved By The Orders Dated 1/6/2018 In Appeal Numbers 128/2017-18 Passed By The Learned Commissioner Of Income

For Appellant: Sh. Rajesh Kumar, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, CA
Section 115Section 14Section 14A

…he above CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression ‘such previous year’. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income’. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘…

DCIT, Circle-9(2), New Delhi vs. Fortis Health Management Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeals of the Revenue are dismissed

ITA 5477/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 Mar 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year : 2014-15 Assessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Sh. N.L. Gandhi, AdvFor Respondent: Ms. Nidhi Srivastava, CIT DR
Section 14Section 14A

…he above CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression ‘such previous year’. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income’. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Ritesh Properties & Industries Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed and the appeal of the assessee is allowed in part

ITA 3920/DEL/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi04 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Shri K. Narasimha Charyassessment Year: 2008-09 Dcit Vs. Ritesh Properties & Industries Ltd. Circle – 15(1), 11/5B, First Floor, Pussa Road, C.R. Bldg., I.P. Estate, New Delhi. New Delhi. Pan Aaacr1437M (Applicant) (Respondent) & Cross Objection No. 329/Del/2011 (In Ita No. 3920/Del/2011) Assessment Year: 2008-09

For Appellant: Sh. Kanv Bali, Sr. DRFor Respondent: Sh. Rohit Jain, Adv
Section 115JSection 139(5)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 2

…he above CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression ‘such previous year’. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income’. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘…

DCIT, Cirlce- 16(2), New Delhi vs. Meyer Apparel Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 4541/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Dec 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri K.N. Chary

Section 115Section 14Section 14A

…el Ltd. CBDT Circular was not accepted, the very purpose of Section 14A would be defeated. He referred to the decisions of the ITAT in ACIT v. Ratan Housing Development Ltd. (order dated 23rd May 2008 of ITAT Lucknow) Relaxo Footwear Ltd. v. Addl. CIT [2012] 50 SOT 102 (Del). xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx 19. In the considered view of the Court, this will be a truncated reading of Section 14 A and Rule 8D particularly when Rule 8D (1) uses the expression ‘such previous year’. Further, it does not account for the concept of ‘real income’. It does not note that under Section 5 of the Act, the question of taxation of ‘…

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

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 2274/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Oct 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Sh. Bhavnesh Sainidr. B. R. R. Kumar(E-Court Module) Ita No. 2274/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2013-14 Vinay Bhasin, Vs Acit, C-14, South Extension, Part-Ii, Circle-63(1), New Delhi-110049 New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaapb3445J Assessee By : Sh. Salil Agarwal, Adv. Revenue By : Sh. Parikshist Singh, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 30.09.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 12.10.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Salil Agarwal, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Parikshist Singh, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 10(38)Section 14A

…e assessee relied upon the following decisions: 1. “CIT vs. Wimco Seedlings – ITA No. 1367/2008, 1368/2008 & ITA No. 1391/2008; 2. ACIT vs. Sun Investments Pvt. Ltd. (2011) 48 SOT 159 (Delhi); 3. Relaxo Footwear Ltd. vs. Addl. CIT, Range-15, New Delhi (2012) 50 SOT 102 (Delhi).” 14. The AO, however, noted that the basic object of section 14A is to disallow the direct and indirect expenditure incurred in relation to income which does not form part of the total income. AO referred to judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltd. 326 ITR 1. The AO also noted that AO ha…