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 366,470 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

Asst CIT 11(1), Mumbai vs. Nimbus Communications Ltd, Mumbai

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

ITA 1332/MUM/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri B R Baskaran & Shri Amit Shukla

For Respondent: Shri N K Chand
Section 143Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 144C(5)Section 14ASection 40Section 92Section 92C

…munications Ltd. ITA 1424/Mum/2014 ITA 1332/Mum/2014 income and any expenditure incurred on such an income has to be disallowed under section 14A. He referred to the decision of Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd v CIT, reported in 347 ITR 272 and drew our attention at Para 24 and 25. Thus, disallowance as made by the AO should be confirmed. 19. After considering the rival submissions and on perusal of the impugned orders, we find that there is no dispute that all the investments have been made in the subsidiary company as the strategic investment so as to get controlling interest in s…

M/S Housing & Urban Devlopment Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3366/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ther submitted that the issue in assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has been restored to the Assessing Officer by the Tribunal following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 347 ITR 272. 9.2 The ld. CIT (DR), on the other hand, submitted that it was not possible to earn the exempt income without incurring any expenses and, therefore, dissatisfaction was implied when the Assessing Officer made the disallowance. He further submitted that even for years prior to assessment year 2008-09 also, Rule 8D can be a guiding principle for d…

M/S Housing & Urban Devlopment Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 3365/DEL/2013[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ther submitted that the issue in assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has been restored to the Assessing Officer by the Tribunal following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 347 ITR 272. 9.2 The ld. CIT (DR), on the other hand, submitted that it was not possible to earn the exempt income without incurring any expenses and, therefore, dissatisfaction was implied when the Assessing Officer made the disallowance. He further submitted that even for years prior to assessment year 2008-09 also, Rule 8D can be a guiding principle for d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. (Hudco), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1562/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ther submitted that the issue in assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has been restored to the Assessing Officer by the Tribunal following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 347 ITR 272. 9.2 The ld. CIT (DR), on the other hand, submitted that it was not possible to earn the exempt income without incurring any expenses and, therefore, dissatisfaction was implied when the Assessing Officer made the disallowance. He further submitted that even for years prior to assessment year 2008-09 also, Rule 8D can be a guiding principle for d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corp. Ltd. (Hudco), New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1561/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ther submitted that the issue in assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has been restored to the Assessing Officer by the Tribunal following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 347 ITR 272. 9.2 The ld. CIT (DR), on the other hand, submitted that it was not possible to earn the exempt income without incurring any expenses and, therefore, dissatisfaction was implied when the Assessing Officer made the disallowance. He further submitted that even for years prior to assessment year 2008-09 also, Rule 8D can be a guiding principle for d…

M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1168/DEL/2012[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ther submitted that the issue in assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has been restored to the Assessing Officer by the Tribunal following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 347 ITR 272. 9.2 The ld. CIT (DR), on the other hand, submitted that it was not possible to earn the exempt income without incurring any expenses and, therefore, dissatisfaction was implied when the Assessing Officer made the disallowance. He further submitted that even for years prior to assessment year 2008-09 also, Rule 8D can be a guiding principle for d…

M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1167/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ther submitted that the issue in assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has been restored to the Assessing Officer by the Tribunal following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 347 ITR 272. 9.2 The ld. CIT (DR), on the other hand, submitted that it was not possible to earn the exempt income without incurring any expenses and, therefore, dissatisfaction was implied when the Assessing Officer made the disallowance. He further submitted that even for years prior to assessment year 2008-09 also, Rule 8D can be a guiding principle for d…

M/S. Housing & Urban Development Corporation Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 1166/DEL/2012[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ther submitted that the issue in assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has been restored to the Assessing Officer by the Tribunal following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 347 ITR 272. 9.2 The ld. CIT (DR), on the other hand, submitted that it was not possible to earn the exempt income without incurring any expenses and, therefore, dissatisfaction was implied when the Assessing Officer made the disallowance. He further submitted that even for years prior to assessment year 2008-09 also, Rule 8D can be a guiding principle for d…

M/S. Housing and Urban Development Corporation Ltd (Hudco), New Delhi vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals filed by the Revenue are allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 4303/DEL/2009[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi09 Feb 2016AY 2004-05

Bench: H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantsl. No.

Section 139(5)Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…ther submitted that the issue in assessment years 2002-03 and 2003-04 has been restored to the Assessing Officer by the Tribunal following the decision of Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. and Ors. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, 347 ITR 272. 9.2 The ld. CIT (DR), on the other hand, submitted that it was not possible to earn the exempt income without incurring any expenses and, therefore, dissatisfaction was implied when the Assessing Officer made the disallowance. He further submitted that even for years prior to assessment year 2008-09 also, Rule 8D can be a guiding principle for d…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. the State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi

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

ITA 2600/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Jetly & Shri S.M. BansalFor Respondent: Shri Aasish Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM & SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JM Assessment Year : 2009-10 The State Trading Corporation of Vs. ACIT, India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan, CR Building, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAACT0102F Assessment Year : 2009-10 ACIT, Vs. The State Trading Circle-16(1), Corporation of India Ltd., CR Building, Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan, New Delhi Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. PAN: AAACT0102F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kamal Jetly & Shri S.M. Bansal, Advocates and Shri Sudhir Gupta, CA Department By : Sh…

The State Trading Corporation of India Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

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

ITA 2383/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Kamal Jetly & Shri S.M. BansalFor Respondent: Shri Aasish Mohanty, Sr. DR
Section 14ASection 43B

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.S. SYAL, AM & SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JM Assessment Year : 2009-10 The State Trading Corporation of Vs. ACIT, India Ltd., Circle-16(1), Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan, CR Building, Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. New Delhi. PAN: AAACT0102F Assessment Year : 2009-10 ACIT, Vs. The State Trading Circle-16(1), Corporation of India Ltd., CR Building, Jawahar Vyapar Bhawan, New Delhi Tolstoy Marg, New Delhi. PAN: AAACT0102F (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Kamal Jetly & Shri S.M. Bansal, Advocates and Shri Sudhir Gupta, CA Department By : Sh…

Sh. Virender Khanna, New Delhi vs. JCIT, New Delhi

In the result, the appeal is partly allowed

ITA 908/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri R.S. Syal, Am & Smt. Beena A. Pillai, Jm Assessment Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Shri Sandeep Sapra, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Aasish Mohanty, Sr. DR

…earning this exempt income. This demonstrates recording of a proper satisfaction by the AO. The assessment year under consideration is 2009-10. As per the judgment of the Hon’ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. vs. CIT (2012) 347 ITR 272 (Del), the provisions of Rule 8D are applicable from assessment year 2008-09. As the AO has made disallowance u/s 14A only in terms of Rule 8D(2)(iii), we find that no 13 exception can be taken to the sustenance of this disallowance. We, therefore, uphold the disallowance. This ground fails. 26. In the result, the appeal is partly allowed. Th…

M/S. Klj Town Planners (P) Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee stands allowed

ITA 308/DEL/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri S.V. Mehrotra & Smt. Beena A. Pillai

Section 143(1)Section 14A

…Industries Ltd., reported [2009] 319 ITR 204. iv) CIT -I v. Corrtech Energy (P) Ltd reported [2014] 223 Taxmann 130 (Guj.) v) CIT, Kanpur v. Shivam Motors (P) Ltd.(All) in ITA No. 88/2014 vide order dated 05.05.2014. 6.4. As per Maxopp Investment Ltd., (2012) 347 ITR 272 (Del), the correctness of the claim of the assessee in respect of expenditure incurred in relation to the income which did not form I.T.A. No.308/Del/2014 Assessment year 2009-10 part of total income had to be first ascertained and in case, the assessee claimed that no expenditure was incurred, the Assessing Officer should verify the correctness…

M/S. Azimuth Investments Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, New Delhi

In the result the assessee’s appeal is allowed

ITA 283/DEL/2013[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2016AY 2009-10

Bench: Sri S.V.Mehrotra, Am & Sri C.M.Garg, Jm Ita No. 283/Del./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10

For Appellant: Sh. Surender Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. K.K.Jaiswal, DR
Section 10(34)Section 14ASection 14A(2)Section 250Section 251

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘A’, NEW DELHI Before Sri S.V.Mehrotra, AM And Sri C.M.Garg, JM ITA No. 283/Del./2013 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Azimuth Investments Ltd. Vs ACIT 43, Community Centre, Circle-2(1) New Friends Colony New Delhi New Delhi (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN No. AAACB1031F Appellant by : Sh. Surender Kumar, CA Respondent by : Sh. K.K.Jaiswal, DR Date of Hearing : 15.10.2015 Date of Pronouncement : 08.01.2016 ORDER PER S.V.Mehrotra, A.M. This is an appeal filed by the Assessee against the order dated 07.11.2012 of the Ld. CIT(A)-V, New Delhi. 2. Brief facts of the case…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hcl Infosystems Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three Appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 6420/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. RohitFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…ITA NOS. 3924,6419&6420/Del/2012 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 3924 & 6419/DEL/2012 A.YRS. : 2007-08 & 2008-09 ACIT, M/S HCL CORPORATION LTD., 806 SIDHARTHA, 96, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VS. NEHRU PLACE, ROOM NO. 323, 3RD FLOOR, NEW DELHI - 19 ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., (PAN: AAACS0921R) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 6420/DEL/2012 A.Y. : 2008-09 M/S HCL INFOSYSTEMS LTD., ACIT, 806 SIDHARTHA, 9…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Hcl Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three Appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 6419/DEL/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. RohitFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…ITA NOS. 3924,6419&6420/Del/2012 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 3924 & 6419/DEL/2012 A.YRS. : 2007-08 & 2008-09 ACIT, M/S HCL CORPORATION LTD., 806 SIDHARTHA, 96, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VS. NEHRU PLACE, ROOM NO. 323, 3RD FLOOR, NEW DELHI - 19 ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., (PAN: AAACS0921R) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 6420/DEL/2012 A.Y. : 2008-09 M/S HCL INFOSYSTEMS LTD., ACIT, 806 SIDHARTHA, 9…

ACIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Hcl Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, all the three Appeals filed by the Revenue stand dismissed

ITA 3924/DEL/2012[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi08 Jan 2016AY 2006-07

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

For Appellant: Sh. Ajay Vohra, Sr. Adv. & Sh. RohitFor Respondent: Sh. T. Vasanthan, Sr. DR
Section 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 14A(2)

…ITA NOS. 3924,6419&6420/Del/2012 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI H.S. SIDHU, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. Nos. 3924 & 6419/DEL/2012 A.YRS. : 2007-08 & 2008-09 ACIT, M/S HCL CORPORATION LTD., 806 SIDHARTHA, 96, CENTRAL CIRCLE-2, VS. NEHRU PLACE, ROOM NO. 323, 3RD FLOOR, NEW DELHI - 19 ARA CENTRE, JHANDEWALAN EXTN., (PAN: AAACS0921R) NEW DELHI (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) (RESPONDENT) I.T.A. No. 6420/DEL/2012 A.Y. : 2008-09 M/S HCL INFOSYSTEMS LTD., ACIT, 806 SIDHARTHA, 9…

Super Auto Forge Private Ltd., Chennai vs. ACIT, Chennai

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

ITA 1008/CHNY/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Chennai06 Jan 2016AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Shri G. Pavan Kumarआयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1008/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment Year : 2008-2009. M/S. Super Auto Forge Private Ltd, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner Ts/82/2 Mettu Street, Of Income Tax, Gamapath Nagar, Company Circle Vi(4) Ekkattuthangal, Chennai Chennai 600 097. [Pan Aabcs 0459B ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri. G. Baskar, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri. V. Vivekanandan, IRS, CIT
Section 10ASection 10BSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 70Section 92CSection 92E

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, ‘ए’ "यायपीठ, चे"नई IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI "ी चं" पूजार",लेखा सद"य एवं "ीजी. पवन कुमार,"या"यकसद"यकेसम" BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./I.T.A.No.1008/Mds/2014 "नधा"रण वष" /Assessment year : 2008-2009. M/s. Super Auto Forge Private Ltd, Vs. The Assistant Commissioner TS/82/2 Mettu Street, of Income Tax, Gamapath Nagar, Company Circle VI(4) Ekkattuthangal, Chennai Chennai 600 097. [PAN AABCS 0459B ] (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""यथ"/Respondent) अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/ Appellant by : Shri. G. Baskar, Advocat…

Nadathur Estates P Ltd, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Bangalore

In the result, the appeals by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 1434/BANG/2014[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore30 Dec 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Smt. Asha Vijayaraghavan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri Padamchand Khincha, CAFor Respondent: Dr. P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT(DR)
Section 14ASection 14A(1)Section 14A(2)Section 234BSection 80G

…he method prescribed by the rules. For, it is only in the event of the Assessing Officer not being so satisfied that recourse to the prescribed method is mandated by law. 8. The assessee further relied on the decision in Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (2011) 347 ITR 272 wherein the amended provisions of section ITA Nos.1434 & 1435/Bang/2014 Page 5 of 12 14A(2) had been explained and it was held that determination of the amount of expenditure in relation to exempt income under Rule 8D would only come into play when the Assessing Officer rejects the claim of the assessee. Reliance was also placed on the decision…

Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi-2 vs. Bharti Overseas Pvt. Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA/802/2015HC Delhi17 Dec 2015

Bench: This Court Is Whether The Itat Was Correct In Affirming The Order Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax (A) [‘Cit(A)’] Which Had Confined The Disallowance Under Section 14A Of The Act To Rs. 30,26,552 For The Ay In Question?

Section 10Section 14ASection 260A

…I.T.A No. 802 of 2015 Page 1 of 12 $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 19. + ITA 802/2015 PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI-2 ..... Appellant Through: Mr. P. Roy Chaudhari, Senior Standing counsel with Ms. Lakshmi Gurung and Mr. Ishant Goswami, Advocates. versus BHARTI OVERSEAS PVT. LTD. ..... Respondent Through: Mr.Arvind Kumar, Advocate. CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER O R D E R % 17.12.2015 Dr. S. Muralidhar,…