Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

347 ITR 272High Court2012#129 most cited

What is Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT authority for?

Disallowance under Section 14A cannot exceed the exempt income earned. The Assessing Officer must record satisfaction regarding the assessee's accounts before making any disallowance.

516

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 367,154 Indian tax judgments — from 2013 to 2026.

Also referred to as

Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT · section 14A · disallowance under section 14A · exempt dividend income · satisfaction of AO · Rule 8D · disallowance cannot exceed exempt income

Also reported as

203 Taxmann 36415 Taxmann.com 390

Sections most often in play

Section 14ASection 143(3)Section 115JBSection 8DSection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(iii)Section 36(1)(viia)Section 36(1)(viii)

Issues it is cited on

section 14a(2)disallowance under section 14adisallowance u/s 14asection 14arevenue expendituresection 115jsection 115jbsection 19section 37(1)section 36section 37section 115

Judgments citing Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

Vijaya Bank, Bangalore vs. Addl..C.I.T., Bangalore

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

ITA 331/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raojoint Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ltu, Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S. Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Central Accounts Dept. 41/2, Mg Road, Bangalre-560001. … Respondent Pa No.Aaacv 4791 J & M/S. Vijaya Bank, Ho, Central Accounts Dept. 41/2, M.G.Road, Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ltu, Bangalore. … Respondent Revenue By : Shri P.Chandrashekar, Cit(Dr) Assessee By : Shri S.Ananthan, Ca & Smt.Lalitha Ramaswamy, Ca Date Of Hearing : 07/06/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2016 O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Bank As Well As The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Ltu, Bangalore, Dated 28/11/2013 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. Ita Nos.318 & 331/Bang/2014 Page 2 Of 25 2. Briefly, Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Nationalized Bank Engaged In The Business Of Banking. It Filed Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2009-10 On 29/9/2009 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.540,24,85,305/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, Assessment Was Completed By The Addl. Cit (Ltu), Bangalore, U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act' For Short] Vide Order Dated 30/08/2011 At A Total Income Of Rs.1205,99,81,409/-. While Doing So, The Ao Made The Following Disallowances:

For Appellant: Shri S.Ananthan, CA and Smt.Lalitha Ramaswamy, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.Chandrashekar, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…-rule (2) to rule 8D of the IT Rules. Sub-rule (2) does not come into operation until and unless specific condition in sub-rule (1) is satisfied. This position is reiterated by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (347 ITR 272), and Bombay High Court in Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT (328 ITR 81). The AO had not given any finding as to how the claim of the assessee-bank that no expenditure was incurred to earn exempt income was incorrect. In the absence of such finding, resort cannot be had to the provisions of sub-rule(2) of rule 8D as held by the Hon’ble High…

JCIT, Bangalore vs. M/S Vijaya Bank, Bangalore

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

ITA 318/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore22 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Vijay Pal Rao & Shri Inturi Rama Raojoint Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ltu, Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. M/S. Vijaya Bank, Head Office, Central Accounts Dept. 41/2, Mg Road, Bangalre-560001. … Respondent Pa No.Aaacv 4791 J & M/S. Vijaya Bank, Ho, Central Accounts Dept. 41/2, M.G.Road, Bangalore. … Appellant Vs. Addl. Commissioner Of Income-Tax, Ltu, Bangalore. … Respondent Revenue By : Shri P.Chandrashekar, Cit(Dr) Assessee By : Shri S.Ananthan, Ca & Smt.Lalitha Ramaswamy, Ca Date Of Hearing : 07/06/2016 Date Of Pronouncement : 22/07/2016 O R D E R Per Inturi Rama Rao, Am : These Are Cross Appeals Filed By The Assessee-Bank As Well As The Revenue Directed Against The Order Of The Cit(A), Ltu, Bangalore, Dated 28/11/2013 For The Assessment Year 2009-10. Ita Nos.318 & 331/Bang/2014 Page 2 Of 25 2. Briefly, Facts Of The Case Are That The Assessee Is A Nationalized Bank Engaged In The Business Of Banking. It Filed Return Of Income For The Assessment Year 2009-10 On 29/9/2009 Declaring A Total Income Of Rs.540,24,85,305/-. Against The Said Return Of Income, Assessment Was Completed By The Addl. Cit (Ltu), Bangalore, U/S 143(3) Of The Income-Tax Act, 1961 [Hereinafter Referred To As 'The Act' For Short] Vide Order Dated 30/08/2011 At A Total Income Of Rs.1205,99,81,409/-. While Doing So, The Ao Made The Following Disallowances:

For Appellant: Shri S.Ananthan, CA and Smt.Lalitha Ramaswamy, CAFor Respondent: Shri P.Chandrashekar, CIT(DR)
Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 14ASection 36(1)(vii)Section 36(1)(viia)

…-rule (2) to rule 8D of the IT Rules. Sub-rule (2) does not come into operation until and unless specific condition in sub-rule (1) is satisfied. This position is reiterated by the Hon’ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (347 ITR 272), and Bombay High Court in Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. vs. DCIT (328 ITR 81). The AO had not given any finding as to how the claim of the assessee-bank that no expenditure was incurred to earn exempt income was incorrect. In the absence of such finding, resort cannot be had to the provisions of sub-rule(2) of rule 8D as held by the Hon’ble High…

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

…allowed only with reference to income which is brought under one of the heads of income and is chargeable to tax. 23 [Note: The above observation and ratio were duly considered by Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd V/s.CIT – (2011) 15 Taxmann.com 390 (Delhi)]. b) The AO relied on the decision of Hon’ble ITAT Delhi in the case of Everplus Securities &Finance Ltd (101 ITD 151) wherein relying on the observation particularly in respect of clause 5 of sec.115-O (para 5.15 of the Hon’ble ITAT order), the Hon’ble ITAT considered Hon’ble ITAT Kolkata Bench order in the case of S.G.Investment…

Global Calcium Private Limited, Hosur vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 29/CHNY/2016[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jul 2016AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. M. Viswanathan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 10(33)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

…ished the judicial decisions and formed an unilateral opinion as there is no Breakup of non interest bearing funds were provided by the assessee in the assessment proceedings and relied on the Delhi High Court decision of Maxopp Investment Ltd & Ors. Vs. CIT 347 ITR 272 and observed that the ld. Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction on invoking applicability of provisions of Rule 8D and calculated disallowance u/s. Rule 8D(2) and sustained addition u/sec. 14A Rule 8D "6,24,054/-. Aggrieved by the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee assailed an appeal before Tribunal. 5. Before u…

Global Calcium Private Limited, Hosur vs. DCIT, Chennai

In the result, the appeals of the assessee in ITA Nos

ITA 28/CHNY/2016[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai20 Jul 2016AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumar

For Appellant: Shri. M. Viswanathan, C.AFor Respondent: Shri. A.V.Sreekanth, IRS, JCIT
Section 10(33)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 80I

…ished the judicial decisions and formed an unilateral opinion as there is no Breakup of non interest bearing funds were provided by the assessee in the assessment proceedings and relied on the Delhi High Court decision of Maxopp Investment Ltd & Ors. Vs. CIT 347 ITR 272 and observed that the ld. Assessing Officer has recorded satisfaction on invoking applicability of provisions of Rule 8D and calculated disallowance u/s. Rule 8D(2) and sustained addition u/sec. 14A Rule 8D "6,24,054/-. Aggrieved by the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), the assessee assailed an appeal before Tribunal. 5. Before u…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S H.B. Portfolio Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue and the cross-objection of the assessee both are deemed to be allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1169/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Smt. Beena A. Pillai Mt. Beena A. Pillai Mt. Beena A. Pillaimt. Beena A. Pillai

Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘ DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘ BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI BENCH ‘ ’ : NEW DELHI ’ : NEW DELHI ’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND , JUDICIAL MEMBER SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI MT. BEENA A. PILLAI MT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER MT. BEENA A. PILLAI , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No 1169/Del/2013 ITA No…

Solaris Chemtech Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 5202/DEL/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jul 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri O.P. Kant Assessment Year: 2006-07 Solaris Chemtech Ltd., Vs. Acit, (Now Amalgated With Solaris Circle-9(1), Chemtech Industries Ltd.), New Delhi. Thapar House, 124-Janpath, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacb8394B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 Acit, Vs. Solaris Chemtech Ltd., Circle 9(1), (Now Amalgated With Solaris New Delhi. Chemtech Industries Ltd.), Thapar House, 124-Janpath, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacb8394B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: Shri P.C. Yadav,Adv. Department By: Smt. Rishpal Bedi, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 21.04.2016 Date Of Pronouncement: 18:07.2016 Order Per I.C. Sudhir:

For Appellant: Shri P.C. Yadav,AdvFor Respondent: Smt. Rishpal Bedi, Sr. DR
Section 115J

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH “G” NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI I.C. SUDHIR AND SHRI O.P. KANT Assessment Year: 2006-07 Solaris Chemtech Ltd., vs. ACIT, (Now Amalgated with Solaris Circle-9(1), Chemtech Industries Ltd.), New Delhi. Thapar House, 124-Janpath, New Delhi. (PAN: AAACB8394B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2006-07 ACIT, Vs. Solaris Chemtech Ltd., Circle 9(1), (Now Amalgated with Solaris New Delhi. Chemtech Industries Ltd.), Thapar House, 124-Janpath, New Delhi. (PAN: AAACB8394B) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Shri P.C. Yadav,Adv. Department by: Smt. Rishpal Bedi, Sr. DR D…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Mount Everest Mineral Water Limited, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 6536/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

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

For Appellant: S/Shri Ravi Sharma & Rishabh MalhotraFor Respondent: Shri Deepak Garg, Senior DR
Section 10(34)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…e without recording his dis-satisfaction of the claim and CIT (A) has also erred in sustaining the disallowance u/s 14A to the extent of Rs.5,00,000/- without any justification and relied upon the judgments cited as Maxopp Investments Limited vs. CIT (2012) 347 ITR 272 (Delhi) and order passed by the ITAT, Bangalore Bench ‘B’ in DCIT vs. M/s. Subramanya Constructions & Development Co. Ltd. in ITA No.404/Bang/2013 order dated 20.02.2015. 12. The ratio of the judgment cited as Maxopp Investments Limited (supra) passed by the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court is that “under section 14A(2,) it is a condition pre…

Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

Appeal is allowed

ITA 5720/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jul 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri L.P. Sahu Assessment Year: 2007-08 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Maruti Suzuki India Ltd., Vs. Additional Cit, Plot No.1, Nelson Mandela Road, Range-6, Vasant Road, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaacm0829Q) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. Neeraj Jain, Rohit Jain, Adv. Romit Katyal & Ms. Tejasvi Jain, Cas Department By:Shri Amrendra Kumar, Cit(Dr)

For Appellant: S/Shri Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. NeerajFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT(DR)

…l management (supra) wherein Rule 8D of the Rules was held to be applicable retrospectively to all pending assessments. In this regard, it is further pleaded to the decision of the Division Bench of the Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. : 347 ITR 272, wherein the High Court while referring to the decision of Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. v. DCIT (supra), held that the provisions of Rule 8D would apply prospectively, i.e., from the date of introduction of the Rule. 17.8 In the present case of the assessee, the assessing officer has simply applied the procedure…

M/S. Rathi Graphics Technologies Ltd., New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed in the manner as indicated above

ITA 6006/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Jul 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D.Agarwal & Shri C.M.Garg,Jm

For Appellant: Sh. A.T.Panda, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. R.S.Negi, Sr. DR
Section 14Section 14A

…submitted that the order passed by the CIT(A) upholding the disallowance u/s 14(A) of the Income tax Act, 1961 (for short the Act), is not in accordance with the ratio of the judgment of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT 347 ITR 272 (Del), that disallowance u/s 14A of the Act can only be out of actual expenditure. The ld. Counsel further pointed out Rule 8D of the IT Rules, 1962 is applicable only in a case where the assessing officer is not satisfied with the correctness of the claim of the assessed. The ld. Counsel also pointed out that the CIT(A) Has erred in not apprecia…

Voltas Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl CIT RG 7(3), Mumbai

In the result, the assessee’s appeal for A

ITA 1667/MUM/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 Jul 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Jason P. Boaz & Shri Sandeep Gosainm/S. Voltas Limited Addl. Cit, Range 7(3) Voltas House - A Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Dr. Babasahed Ambedkar Road M.K. Road Chinchpokli, Mumbai 400033 Mumbai 400020 Pan - Aaacv2809D Appellant Respondent

For Appellant: Shri Nitesh JoshiFor Respondent: Shri Neil Philip
Section 14Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "F" Bench, Mumbai Before Shri Jason P. Boaz, Accountant Member and Shri Sandeep Gosain, Judicial Member M/s. Voltas Limited Addl. CIT, Range 7(3) Voltas House - A Aayakar Bhavan Vs. Dr. Babasahed Ambedkar Road M.K. Road Chinchpokli, Mumbai 400033 Mumbai 400020 PAN - AAACV2809D Appellant Respondent Appellant by: Shri Nitesh Joshi Respondent by: Shri Neil Philip Date of Hearing: 26.05.2016 Date of Pronouncement: 08.07.2016 O R D E R Per Jason P. Boaz, A.M. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the CIT(A)- 13, Mumbai dated 16.11.2011 for A.Y. 2008-09.…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Crown Corporation Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 4634/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Kuldip Singh Shri Kuldip Singhshri Kuldip Singh Shri Kuldip Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘ DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘ BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI BENCH ‘ ’ : NEW DELHI ’ : NEW DELHI ’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND , JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI KULDIP SINGH SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI KULDIP SINGH SHRI KULDIP SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No 4463/Del/2013 ITA No 4463/Del…

M/S Crown Corporation (P) Ltd, New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 4463/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi27 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawalbefore Shri G.D. Agrawal & And Before Shri Before Shri G.D. Agrawalg.D. Agrawal & And Shri Kuldip Singh Shri Kuldip Singhshri Kuldip Singh Shri Kuldip Singh

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘ DELHI DELHI BENCH ‘ BENCH ‘B’ : NEW DELHI BENCH ‘ ’ : NEW DELHI ’ : NEW DELHI ’ : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND BEFORE SHRI BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND AND , JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI KULDIP SINGH SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER SHRI KULDIP SINGH SHRI KULDIP SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER , JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No 4463/Del/2013 ITA No 4463/Del…

Ravi Mohan Gehi, Mumbai vs. DCIT 20(2), Mumbai

In the result, this appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 5127/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai24 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Ashwani Tanejaassessment Year: 2009-10 Ravi Mohan Gehi, Dcit 20(2) Ms. Growmore Estate 6Th Floor, Piramal बनाम/ Consultants, Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. B-7, Navakar Chambers, Mumbai-400012 Andheri Kurla Rd, Andheri(E) Mumbai -400059 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.Aeppg1674M "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee By None राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue By Shri Kakesh Rangan (Dr)

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई "यायपीठ,D,मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCHES “D”, MUMBAI "ी जो"ग"दर "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं "ी अ"वनी तनेजा, लेखा सद"य, के सम" Before Shri Joginder Singh, Judicial Member, and Shri Ashwani Taneja, Accountant Member Assessment Year: 2009-10 Ravi Mohan Gehi, DCIT 20(2) Ms. Growmore Estate 6th Floor, Piramal बनाम/ Consultants, Chambers, Lalbaug, Vs. B-7, Navakar Chambers, Mumbai-400012 Andheri Kurla Rd, Andheri(E) Mumbai -400059 (Assessee) (Revenue) P.A. No.AEPPG1674M "नधा"रती क" ओर से / Assessee by None राज"व क" ओर से / Revenue by Shri Kakesh Rangan (DR) 14/06/2016…

Silvassa Estates P.Ltd, Mumbai vs. ITO 8(3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee company in ITA N0

ITA 7383/MUM/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai14 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad & Shri Ramit Kocharआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7383/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/S Silvassa Estates Pvt. The Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ Ltd., Ward 8(3)(2), V. M/S Natvarlal Vepari & Co., Aaykar Bhavan, 2 Nd Floor, Oricon House, 4Th Floor, Maharshi Karve Road, 12, K. Dubash Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 023. "थायी लेखा सं./Pan : Aaacs6303D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent)

For Respondent: Shri Vishwas Jadhav,DR
Section 143(3)Section 14A

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण “E” "यायपीठ मुंबई म"। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “E” BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI C.N. PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A. No.7383/Mum/2012 ("नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Year : 2009-10) M/s Silvassa Estates Pvt. The Income Tax Officer, बनाम/ Ltd., Ward 8(3)(2), v. M/s Natvarlal Vepari & Co., Aaykar Bhavan, 2 nd floor, Oricon House, 4th floor, Maharshi Karve Road, 12, K. Dubash Marg, Mumbai – 400 020. Mumbai – 400 023. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN : AAACS6303D (अपीलाथ" /Appellant) .. (""यथ" / Respondent) Assessee by Shri N. Jayendra Revenue by : Shri…

M/S. Oks Span Tech Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed

ITA 481/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri N. K. Saini & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

For Appellant: Shri Ved Jin, CAFor Respondent: Shri Amrendra Kumar, CIT DR
Section 14A

…he computation of disallowance u/s 14A done by the assessee was not correct. No error or defect has been pointed out. Under these circumstances, we have to apply the proposition laid down by the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. 347 ITR 272 and delete the addition made by the A.O. 25 I.T.A.No.481./Del/2014 6.7 Respectfully following the decision of this tribunal in assessee’s own case for assessment year 2008-09, we are inclined to delete the addition made by the ld.AO under section 14 A of the act. Accordingly this ground of assessee stands allowed. 7. In the result the appeal f…

Sh. Pradeep Khanna, New Delhi vs. ITO, New Delhi

In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1250/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jun 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri H.S. Sidhu & Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Rajesh Mahna, Adv
Section 147Section 14ASection 154

…f the appellant. 2. That the CIT(A) and AO both have failed to appreciate that all the investment have been made by the appellants out of the spare funds available with the appellants and there are no presumption of expenditure – reference ACIT vs. MAXXOP LTD 347 ITR 272 (DELHI) 3. The order of the CIT(A) and AO are bad in law and against the facts of the case.” 2. The brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual filed return of income declaring income of Rs. 18,72,890/- on 29.2.2009. Assessee is engaged in the business of export of ladies garments. During the year assessee has earned exempt income…

M/S. Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 3461/DEL/2013[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi02 Jun 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastavaay: 2006-07 M/S Pepsico India Holdings Pvt. Ltd., Vs Acit, No.54, Lower Ground Floor, Circle 14(1), World Trade Centre, C.R. Building, Barakhamba Road, New Delhi. New Delhi-110001 (Pan: Aaacp1272G) (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. Adv. Shri Vishal Kalra, Adv. Respondent By: Ms Susan D. George, Sr. Dr

For Appellant: Shri C.S. Aggarwal, Sr. AdvFor Respondent: Ms Susan D. George, Sr. DR
Section 10(34)Section 115JSection 14A

…integra that the provisions of rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 are applicable from AY 2008-2009 onwards and disallowance cannot be made by applying the Rule 8D for the assessment years prior thereto as held in case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT (347 ITR 272) (Del). It is submitted that since the instant assessment year is AY 2006-07, as such, disallowance made of Rs 1,18,04,860 per-se is untenable and unsustainable in law. It was further submitted that before invoking the provisions of section 14A of the Act, the AO has to record a satisfaction vis a vis books of accounts of the assessee that exp…

Deva Lease & Finance Pvt Ltd, Kolkata vs. I.T.O WD - 3(1), Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 1554/KOL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09 Deva Lease & Finance (P)Ltd. -Versus- C.I.T., Kol-1`, Kolkata Kolkata (Pan:Aabcd7839E) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri D.K.Kothari, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR)
Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 263

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘A’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment Year : 2008-09 Deva Lease & Finance (P)Ltd. -versus- C.I.T., Kol-1`, Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AABCD7839E) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Appellant: Shri D.K.Kothari, FCA For the Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 18.05.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 01.06.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM: This is an appeal by the Assessee against the order dated 26.03.2013 of CIT, Kolkata-1, Kolkata, relating to AY 2008-09 passed u/s 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (A…

Allahabad Bank, Kolkata vs. Add.CIT, Range-6, Kolkata

In the result the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1199/KOL/2012[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata01 Jun 2016AY 2008-2009

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, Jm & Shri M.Balaganesh, Am ] Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Barun Kumar Ghosh & Shri Piyush Dey, FCAFor Respondent: Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR)
Section 28Section 36Section 36(1)Section 36(1)(viia)

…1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH ‘A’ KOLKATA [Before Hon’ble Shri N.V.Vasudevan, JM & Shri M.Balaganesh, AM ] Assessment Year : 2008-09 Allahabad Bank -versus- Addl. C.I.T., Range-6, Kolkata Kolkata (PAN:AACCA8464F) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year : 2008-09 D.C.I.T., Circle-6, , -versus- Allahabad Bank Kolkata Kolkata (PAN: AACCA8464F) (Appellant) (Respondent) For the Assessee: Shri Barun Kumar Ghosh & Shri Piyush Dey, FCA For the Department : Shri Rajat Subhra Biswas, CIT(DR) Date of Hearing : 18.05.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 01.06.2016. ORDER PER N.V.VASUDEVAN, JM: ITA No.1199/Ko…