Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' v. CIT

247 ITR 162Reported decision#4550 most cited

What is Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' v. CIT authority for?

When an Assessing Officer (AO) is not satisfied with the assessee's explanation or working regarding expenditure, disallowance under Section 14A must be made on a reasonable basis. The AO's dissatisfaction must stem from an objective analysis and cogent reasons.

26

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2016 to 2022.

Also referred to as

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT · 247 ITR 162 · Section 14A · disallowance · reasonable basis · AO satisfaction · objective analysis · cogent reasons

Judgments citing Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' v. CIT

ACIT CIRCLE 1, TRICHY vs. DALMIA BHARAT LTD., TRICHY

In the result, appeal of the revenue being devoid of merits is dismissed

ITA 3156/CHNY/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 Mar 2022AY 2014-15

Bench: S/Shri Shri Chandra Mohan Garg, Judicial & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpia & Arun Khodpiaassessment Year : 2014-15 Acit, Circle-1, Vs. M/S. M/S. Dalmia Dalmia Bharat Bharat Trichy Ltd.,Dalmiapuram, Tamilnadu - Ltd.,Dalmiapuram, Tamilnadu 621 651, Pan/Gir No.Aajcs 7366 K Aajcs 7366 K (Appellant) (Appellant .. ( Respondent Respondent) Assessee By : N O N E Revenue By : Dr S.Palanikumar, Cit (Dr Dr) Date Of Hearing : 24 /2/ 2022 2 Date Of Pronouncement : 31/3/20 /2022 O R D E R Per C.M.Garg, Jm , Jm

For Appellant: N o n eFor Respondent: Dr S.Palanikumar, CIT (DR
Section 14A

…5 the assessee in para 7 of the impugned order, wherein, the assessee after submitting the factual details of the issue has relied on various judgments including the judgment of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others v. CIT' 247 ITR 162 and another judgment in the case of Priya Exhibitors Pvt Ltd. Vs ACIT (2012) 32 CCH 430 (Del, wherein, it was held that when the AO records a finding that he is not satisfied with the assessee’s claim, Rule 8D comes into play. Further, such satisfaction must be drawn after an objective analysis and for cogent reasons that the amount of such expen…

VTL INVESTMENTS LTD.,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 539/CHANDI/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Dec 2018AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 762/Chd/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 The Acit, M/S Vtl Investment Ltd., बनाम Circle 2(1), (Formerly Known As Vardhman Chandigarh Threads Ltd.,) Vardhman Complex, Chandigarh Road "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcv7449L Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Chandigarh Dated 01.05.2009

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh.G.S.Phani, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 80

…t satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd, & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). In respect of cases prior to assessment year 2008-09, the different co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal have observed that certain percentage of exempt income can constitute a reasonable estimate for making disallowance for the years earlier to assessment year 2008-09. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. Godrej Agrovet Ltd…

ACIT,, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S VTL INVESTMENT LTD.,, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 762/CHANDI/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 762/Chd/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 The Acit, M/S Vtl Investment Ltd., बनाम Circle 2(1), (Formerly Known As Vardhman Chandigarh Threads Ltd.,) Vardhman Complex, Chandigarh Road "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcv7449L Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Chandigarh Dated 01.05.2009

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh.G.S.Phani, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 80

…t satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd, & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). In respect of cases prior to assessment year 2008-09, the different co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal have observed that certain percentage of exempt income can constitute a reasonable estimate for making disallowance for the years earlier to assessment year 2008-09. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. Godrej Agrovet Ltd…

VTL INVESTMENTS LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. ADDL. CIT, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 550/CHANDI/2009[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh11 Dec 2018AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Ms. Annapurna Guptaआयकर अपील सं./ Ita Nos. 762/Chd/2009 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 The Acit, M/S Vtl Investment Ltd., बनाम Circle 2(1), (Formerly Known As Vardhman Chandigarh Threads Ltd.,) Vardhman Complex, Chandigarh Road "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcv7449L Appeal Against The Order Of Cit(A), Chandigarh Dated 01.05.2009

For Appellant: Sh. Subhash Agrawal, AdvocateFor Respondent: Sh.G.S.Phani, CIT DR
Section 14ASection 80

…t satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd, & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). In respect of cases prior to assessment year 2008-09, the different co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal have observed that certain percentage of exempt income can constitute a reasonable estimate for making disallowance for the years earlier to assessment year 2008-09. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. Godrej Agrovet Ltd…

ACIT, CHANDIGARH vs. M/S PUNJAB STATE WAREHOUSING CORPORATION, CHANDIGARH

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

ITA 459/CHANDI/2006[1996-97]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Oct 2018AY 1996-97

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg, Judicial Membe & Dr. B.R.R.Kumarआयकर अपील सं./ Ita No. 459/Chd/2006 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 1996-97 The Acit, M/S Punjab State बनाम Circle 2(1), Warehousing Corpn Ltd., Chandigarh Sco 74-75, Sector 17-B, Chandigarh "थायी लेखा सं./Pan No: Aabcp7825J अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent

For Appellant: Shri T.N Singla, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ashish Abrol, CIT DR
Section 10(29)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…hd-2006 M/s Punjab State Warehousing Corpn Ltd., Chandigarh 4 disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd, & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). In respect of cases prior to assessment year 2008-09, the different co-ordinate Benches of this Tribunal have observed that certain percentage of exempt income can constitute a reasonable estimate for making disallowance for the years earlier to assessment year 2008-09. The Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘CIT Vs. Godrej Agrovet Ltd.,…

ITO 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ARCHWAY INVESTMENTS CO. P. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7215/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.8461/M/2010 & 5598/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Archway Investment Ito-2(1)(1), Company Limited, Mumbai Neville House, बनाम/Vs. J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'यथ% &'यथ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'यथ% &'यथ% आयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.948/M/2011, 7215/M/2012 & 6013/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08, 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Ito-2(1)(1), Archway Investment Co. Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Neville House, बनाम/Vs. M.K. Road, J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Mumbai-400 020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'य थ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'य &'यथ% &'य थ% थ% Present For: Assessee By : Shri Yogesh Thar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 14A

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 6. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under suc…

ITO 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ARCHWAY INVESTMENT CO. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 948/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.8461/M/2010 & 5598/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Archway Investment Ito-2(1)(1), Company Limited, Mumbai Neville House, बनाम/Vs. J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'यथ% &'यथ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'यथ% &'यथ% आयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.948/M/2011, 7215/M/2012 & 6013/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08, 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Ito-2(1)(1), Archway Investment Co. Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Neville House, बनाम/Vs. M.K. Road, J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Mumbai-400 020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'य थ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'य &'यथ% &'य थ% थ% Present For: Assessee By : Shri Yogesh Thar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 14A

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 6. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under suc…

ITO 2(1)(1), MUMBAI vs. ARCHWAY INVESTMENT CO. LTD, MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 6013/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.8461/M/2010 & 5598/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Archway Investment Ito-2(1)(1), Company Limited, Mumbai Neville House, बनाम/Vs. J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'यथ% &'यथ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'यथ% &'यथ% आयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.948/M/2011, 7215/M/2012 & 6013/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08, 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Ito-2(1)(1), Archway Investment Co. Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Neville House, बनाम/Vs. M.K. Road, J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Mumbai-400 020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'य थ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'य &'यथ% &'य थ% थ% Present For: Assessee By : Shri Yogesh Thar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 14A

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 6. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under suc…

ARCHWAY INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 2(1)(1`), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 5598/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.8461/M/2010 & 5598/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Archway Investment Ito-2(1)(1), Company Limited, Mumbai Neville House, बनाम/Vs. J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'यथ% &'यथ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'यथ% &'यथ% आयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.948/M/2011, 7215/M/2012 & 6013/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08, 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Ito-2(1)(1), Archway Investment Co. Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Neville House, बनाम/Vs. M.K. Road, J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Mumbai-400 020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'य थ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'य &'यथ% &'य थ% थ% Present For: Assessee By : Shri Yogesh Thar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 14A

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 6. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under suc…

ARCHWAY INVESTMENT COMPANY LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO 2(1)(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed whereas the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 8461/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai10 Feb 2017AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Rajendra & Shri Sanjay Gargआयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.8461/M/2010 & 5598/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years: 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Archway Investment Ito-2(1)(1), Company Limited, Mumbai Neville House, बनाम/Vs. J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'यथ% &'यथ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'यथ% &'यथ% आयकर अपील सं././././Ita Nos.948/M/2011, 7215/M/2012 & 6013/M/2011 आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं आयकर अपील सं िनधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year: 2007-08, 2007-08 & 2008-09) (िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" िनधा"रण वष" Ito-2(1)(1), Archway Investment Co. Aayakar Bhavan, Ltd., R.No.561, 5Th Floor, Neville House, बनाम/Vs. M.K. Road, J.N. Heredia Marg, बनाम बनाम बनाम Mumbai-400 020 Ballard Estate, Mumbai-400 001 Pan: Aaaca5507H (अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ%/Appellant) (&'य थ%/Respondent) अपीलाथ% अपीलाथ% &'य &'यथ% &'य थ% थ% Present For: Assessee By : Shri Yogesh Thar, A.R. Revenue By : Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R.

For Appellant: Shri Yogesh Thar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, D.R
Section 14A

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 6. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under suc…

M/S. TATA INDUSTRIES LTD,MUMBAI vs. THE ITO 2(3)(3), MUMBAI

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

ITA 4894/MUM/2008[2004-2005]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai20 Jul 2016AY 2004-2005

Bench: Shri G. S. Pannu, Accoutant Member & Shri Sanjay Gargtata Industries Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward- Bombay House,24,Homi 2 (3) (3), Room No.555, Mody Street, Fort, Mumbai Aayakar Bhavan, Maharshi 400 001 Karve Road, Mumbai 400 020 Pan: Aaact 4058 L Appellant .. Respondent Appellant By Shri Dinesh Vyas, Ar Respondent By Shri Alok Johri, Dr Date Of Hearing 22-06-2016 Date Of Pronouncement 20-07-2016

Section 10ASection 115JSection 14ASection 36

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). Hence, the rule 8 D of the Income Tax Rules is not applicable for the Assessment year under consideration. Disallowance under section 14 A, thus, can be made on some reasonable basis for the year under consideration and not under rule 8 D as held by the Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of ‘Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Co. Ltd’. (supra). 2…

CIBA INDIA LTD ( THROUGH THEIR SUCCESORS BASF INDIA LTD),MUMBAI vs. ADDL CIT CIR 8(1), MUMBAI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for

ITA 759/MUM/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendraassessment Year-2007-08 Ciba India Limited (Through Addl. Cit, Their Successors Basf India Circle-8(1), बनाम/ Ltd.), 1St Floor, Vibgyor Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Towers, Unit No.101, M.K. Road, Plot No.C-62, G-Block, Mumbai-400020 Bandra Kurla Complex, Bandra (East), Mumbai-400051 Pan No. Aaccr3698A (राज"व /Revenue) ("नधा"रती /Assessee)

Section 14A

…not satisfied with the explanation/working given by the assessee, disallowance under section 14A has to be made on a reasonable basis. Almost similar view has been expressed by Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of 'Maxopp Investment Ltd. & Others' vs. CIT (247 ITR 162). 5. It may be further observed that it is not a case where no exempt income was received by the assessee despite making investments for earning exempt income. It is also not the case of the Revenue that the exempt income earned by the assessee was very less or not in proportion to the investments made by the assessee for this purpose. Under su…

A.C.I.T. 4(2), MUMBAI vs. VIMLA SURESH JAJOO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4476/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

A.C.I.T. 4(2), MUMBAI vs. SURESH K. JAJOO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4475/MUM/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

SURESH K JAJOO,MUMBAI vs. ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 4366/MUM/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI vs. SURESH K JAJOO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5303/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI vs. VIMLA S. JAJOO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5302/MUM/2011[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT CIR 4(2), MUMBAI vs. SURESH K JAJOO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 3053/MUM/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

DCIT 4(2), MUMBAI vs. VIMLA S. JAJOO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 2469/MUM/2009[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

ACIT CIR-4(2), MUMBAI vs. M/S. SURESH K. JAJOO, MUMBAI

In the result, all the appeals of the Revenue are hereby dismissed and the appeal of the assessee i

ITA 5442/MUM/2008[2005-2006]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai22 Jan 2016AY 2005-2006

Bench: Shri Sanjay Garg & Shri Ashwani Taneja

For Appellant: Dr. Santosh Mankoskar, A.RFor Respondent: Shri Madhur Agarwal, D.R
Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI BENCH “F”, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ASHWANI TANEJA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA Nos.5442/M/2008, 4475/M/2012, 3053/M/2011, 5303/M/011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 ACIT, Shri Suresh K. Jajoo, 7/10, 1st Floor, Circle – 4(2), Room No.642, 6th Floor, Botawala Bldg., Vs. Aayakar Bhavan, Near Horniman Circle, M.K. Road, Fort, Mumbai - 400020 Mumbai – 400 001 PAN: AAFPJ 0070J (Appellant) (Respondent) ITA Nos.5441/M/2008, 2469/M/2009, 4476/M/2012, 5302/M/2011 Assessment Years: 2005-06, 2006-07, 2008-09 ACIT, Smt. Vimala S.…

Showing 1–20 of 26 · Page 1 of 2