How many judgments cite Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT?

516 judgments on BharatTax cite Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT (347 ITR 272), spanning 2013 to 2026.

Which sections of the Income Tax Act does Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT come up under?

It is most often cited in judgments turning on Section 14A, Section 143(3), Section 115JB, Section 8D, Section 36(1)(vii), Section 36(1)(iii).

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 14A Section 143(3)Section 115JB Section 8D Section 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 14a disallowance u/s 14a section 14a revenue expenditure section 115j section 115jb section 19 section 37(1)section 36 section 37 section 115

Judgments citing Maxopp Investment Ltd. v. CIT

Addlcit, Special Range-6, Neww Delhi vs. National Building Construction Corporation Ltd., New Delhi

Appeals are disposed of by this common order

ITA 4165/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi26 Jul 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamblea N D Shri Prashant Maharishi

For Appellant: Shri Sachin Kumar, C.AFor Respondent: Shri Gaurav Pundir, Sr. D. R

Section 140ASection 143(3)Section 14ASection 244ASection 37(1)Section 40

…mstances of the case, Ld.CIT(A) is legally Justified in deletingdisallowance u/s 14A of the Act without considering ratio decidendi as upheld in cases of CIT Vs. Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P. Ltdd [2010] 326 ITR 1 (SC) and Maxopp Investment Vs CIT [2012] 347 ITR 272 (Delhi) onapplication of provision of section 14A of the Act? " 4. Whether infacts and on circumstances of the case,the Ld.CIT (A) is Legally justified indeleting disallowance of Rs. 1,92,30,000/- u/s 40(a)(ia) of the Act on account of non-deduction of TDS on ‘Bank Guarantee Expenses’ by ignoring the contents of Notification No. 56/2012 of the C…

ACIT, Circle- 13(2), New Delhi vs. Jindal Petroleum Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the ld

ITA 4313/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jul 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Acit, M/S. Jindal Petroleum Ltd., Vs. Jindal Centre, Circle : 13 (2), 12 – Bhikaji Cama Place, New Delhi – 110 066. New Delhi. Pan : Aaccj0610J (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: NoneFor Respondent: Ms. Shivani Basal, Sr. D.R

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Whether in facts in circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) is justified in not upholding disallowance of Rs.55,06,261 u/s 14A of the Act ITA 4313 (Del) of 2017 without considering ratio decidendi as upheld in case of Maxopp Investment vs. CIT [2012 347 ITR 272 (Delhi)] on application of provisions of section 14A of the Act? 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs.74,52,504/- made by AO on issue of disallowance on account of excess depreciation. 5. That on the facts and circumstances of the case & in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has er…

Hero Motocrop Ltd., New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 11(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

ITA 9187/DEL/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi13 Apr 2021AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava & Shri O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2015-16

Section 115JSection 143(3)Section 144CSection 145ASection 80ISection 92C

…isallowance as per Rule 8D needs to be deleted. Reliance in this regard was placed on the following decisions: - CIT vs. Walfort Share & Stock Brokers 326 ITR 1(SC) - Godrej & Boyce Manufacturing Company Ltd. VS. DCIT: 394 ITR 449(SC) - Maxopp Investment Ltd: 347 ITR 272 (Del.)- Affirmed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in 402 ITR 640 - CIT v. Essar Teleholdings Ltd.: 401 ITR 445 (SC) - PCIT v. Vedanta Ltd.: [2019] 261 Taxman 179 (Delhi) - H.T. Media Limited v. PCIT: 399 ITR 576 (Del) - Eicher Motors Ltd. vs. CIT: 398 ITR 51 (Del) - PCIT vs. U.K. Paints (India) (P.) Ltd.: 392 ITR 552 (Del.) - CIT v. Abhishek Industri…

DCIT Cen Cir 4(2), Mumbai vs. Mitesh Ilesh Gadhia, Mumbai

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

ITA 538/MUM/2019[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2021AY 2010-11

For Appellant: Shri Mayur KisnadwalFor Respondent: Shri Sanjay Sethi (Sr. AR)

Section 132Section 143(3)Section 14ASection 153A

…ls Disallowance u/s 13 A.Y.2010-11 14A can be made only when the assessee has actually incurred an expenditure in relation to earning of exempt income. This is as per the ratio of the decisions laid out by the Hon'ble Courts in the cases of Maxopp Investment (15 Taxmann.com 390) (Delhi HC), Cheminvest Ltd ITA No 749/2014) (Delhi HC) and Hero Cycles Ltd (323 ITR 518) (P & H HC). Once it is found that the assessee has incurred an expenditure in relation to earning of exempt income, the quantum of disallowance u/s 14A can be computed by the AO by applying rule 8D if the AO is not satisfied with the correctness of th…

Bachhraj Factories Pvt Ltd., Mumbai vs. ACIT Circle-3(1)(1), Mumbai

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

ITA 3986/MUM/2019[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai07 Apr 2021AY 2014-15

For Appellant: Shri Kirit KamdarFor Respondent: Shri Tharian Oommen (DR)

Section 143(2)Section 14A

…owance u/s 14A of the Act. This decision was followed by the Hon‟ble Bombay High Court in the case of Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd. Vs. CIT 328 ITR 81 . 4.10. He further referred to the decision of Hon‟ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. 347 ITR 272, wherein it has been held that no disallowance could be made under the said section where no expenditure had „actually‟ been incurred by the assessee in relation to earning of the exempt income. The Hon‟ble Delhi High Court approved the contention raised by the assessee that the term „expenditure incurred‟ appearing in Sec. 14A(1) of the Act woul…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S Malana Power Co. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3713/del/2017 for assessment year 2012 – 13 is dismissed

ITA 3713/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Amit Shuklaa N D Shri Prashant Maharishi(Through Video Conferencing) Dcit, Vs. Malana Power Co. Ltd, Bhilwara Bhawan, Circle-16(1)M 40-41, Community Centre, New Friends Colony, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabcm1108R (Appellant) (Respondent) Malana Power Co. Ltd, Vs. Addl. Dcit, Bhilwara Bhawan, 40-41, Community Centre, New Range-6, Friends Colony, New Delhi New Delhi Pan: Aabcm1108R (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sohil Malik, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 14Section 14ASection 2(14)Section 80I

…in not upholding the disallowance u/s 14 A of the Act r.w. R 8D of the Rule of Rs. 2,46,47,780/- without considering ratio decidendi as upheld in cases of CIT Vs Walfort Share and Stock Brokers P Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 1 (SC) and Maxopp Investment Vs CIT [2012] 347 ITR 272 (Delhi) on application of provisions of section 14 A of the Act? 5. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) is legally justified in allowing deduction u/s 80IA of the Act on amount of Rs. 5,07,000/- which include ‘income from other sources’ including rental income? 6. Whether on facts and in circumstances of the case, th…

Malana Power Co. Ltd., New Delhi vs. Addl. CIT, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed by the learned assessing officer in ITA number 3713/del/2017 for assessment year 2012 – 13 is dismissed

ITA 2464/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi23 Mar 2021AY 2012-13

For Appellant: Shri P. K. Jain, CAFor Respondent: Shri Sohil Malik, Sr. DR

Section 115JSection 14Section 14ASection 2(14)Section 80I

M/S Haryana State Industrial & Infrastructure Development Corpn., Panchkula vs. ACIT, Panchkula

In the result, all the above appeals of the assessee are

ITA 275/CHANDI/2020[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Chandigarh04 Mar 2021AY 2006-07

Bench: The Itat. That In The First Round The Itat Had Held The Provisions Of Section 14A Of The Act, For The Purposes Of Disallowing Expenses Relating To Exempt Income, Applicable In The Facts Of The Present Cases On Noting That The Assessee Had Earned Exempt Income In The Form

For Appellant: Shri A.K. Jindal, CAFor Respondent: Smt.Meenakshi Vohra, Addl.CIT

Section 14ASection 250(6)

…आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, च"डीगढ़ "यायपीठ “ए”, च"डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH ‘A’, CHANDIGARH "ीमती "दवा "संह, "या"यक सद"य एवं, एवं "ीमती अ"नपूणा" गु"ता, लेखा सद"य BEFORE: SMT.DIVA SINGH, JUDICAL MEMBER AND SMT.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ITA Nos.275 to 279/Chd/2020 "नधा"रण वष" / Assessment Years : 2006-07 to 2010-11 M/s Haryana State Industrial बनाम The A.C.I.T., and Infrastructure Panchkula Circle, Development Corporation Panchkula. Ltd., C-13-14, Sector 6, Panchkula. "थायी लेखा सं./PAN NO: AAACH4114R अपीलाथ"/Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent "नधा"रती क" ओर से/Assessee…

Amit Gupta, New Delhi vs. ACIT, Circle- 19(1), New Delhi

The appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 127/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi18 Feb 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Ms Suchitra Kamble & Dr. B. R. R. Kumar

Section 14A

…the provisions of section 14A shall not be applicable in this case. 2 3. The CIT while confirming the order of the AO has grossly failed to consider the ratio of the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Maxopp Investment Ltd. vs. CIT - [2011] 203 Taxmann 364 (Delhi).” 3. The assessee company e-filed its return of income for Assessment Year 2014-15 on 19/12/2014 declaring total income of Rs. 1,46,58,320/-. The assessment was passed on 29/11/2016 thereby assessing the income at Rs. 1,50,64,000/-after making disallowance of Rs.4,05,684/- u/s 14A read with Rule 8D of the Income Tax Rules, 1962. 4. B…

M/S Kodagu District Co-Operative Central Bank Ltd vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax

In the result, the order passed by the Assessing

ITA/318/2016HC Karnataka19 Jan 2021

Bench: ALOK ARADHE,R. NATARAJ

Section 14ASection 260

…s neither been appreciated by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) nor the Tribunal. In support of aforesaid submission, reliance has been placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in 'MAXOPP INVESTMENT LTD. Vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME- TAX', [2012] 347 ITR 272 (DELHI), which has been upheld by the Supreme Court in the decision reported in 'MAXOPP INVESTMENT LTD. Vs. CIT', (2018) 402 ITR 640. On the other hand, learned counsel for the revenue 5 has invited our attention to Paragraphs 10 and 11 of the order passed by the Tribunal and has submitted that all the authorities under the Act have ri…

ACIT, Circle-6(1), New Delhi vs. Clix Finance India Unlimited (Earlier Known Asge Capital Services India), New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1075/DEL/2018[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi14 Jan 2021AY 2012-13

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 14A

…s received or receivable during the relevant previous year. [Para 23]." In the said judgment the Hon'ble Delhi High Court followed the case of CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. 57 Taxmann.com 28 (2015) Delhi and distinguished the decision of Maxopp Investment Ltd. 347 ITR 272. However, the appellant has suo-moto disallowed an amount of Rs.64,30,120/- u/s. 14A of the I.T. Act. , thereby in principle the appellant has admitted that considering the facts of the case there 3 ITA No.1075/Del./2018 are expenses attributable to earning of exempt income. Now the only question which remains, was quantum of such expense. The…

Addl. CIT, Special Range-7, New Delhi vs. Rites Ltd., Gurgaon

ITA 6448/DEL/2017[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2021AY 2014-15

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 37

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL (DELHI BENCH ‘F’ : NEW DELHI) BEFORE SHRI N.K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER and SHRI KULDIP SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCE) ITA No.6447/Del./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) ITA No.6448/Del./2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15) Addl. CIT, Spl. Range 7, vs. M/s. Rites Limited, New Delhi. Rites Bhawan, Plot No.1, Sector 29, Gurgaon – 122 001. (PAN : AAACR0830Q) CO No.78/Del.2019 (in ITA No.6447/Del./2017) (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14) M/s. Rites Limited, vs. Addl. CIT, Spl. Range 7, Rites Bhawan, New Delhi. Plot No.1, Sector 29, Gurgaon – 122 001. (PAN : AAACR0830Q) (…

Addl. CIT, Special Range-7, New Delhi vs. Rites Ltd., Gurgaon

ITA 6447/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Jan 2021AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh(Through Video Conference)

For Appellant: Shri Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Ms. Sushma Singh, CIT DR

Section 14ASection 37

ACIT, Circle- 31(1), New Delhi vs. Iffco Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 7367/DEL/2017[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Jan 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Amit Shukla & Shri O.P. Kant[Through Video Conferencing]

Section 143(3)Section 14A

…Tribunal’). The Tribunal in its order dated 24/09/2014 passed in ITA No. 2238 & 2320/Del./2012, observing that the Assessing Officer was not having benefit of the decision of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Maxopp investment Vs CIT (2012) 347 ITR 272 (Del), and therefore, restored the matter back to the Assessing Officer for passing a speaking order in accordance with law. The relevant finding of the Tribunal is reproduced as under: “2. The Ld. AR inviting attention to the grounds raised in assessee’s appeal submitted that the ground which he would be relying upon is Ground No-3 and the other…

The DCIT, Circle-1, Ahmedabad vs. Aia Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad

In the result, ITA Appeals 1766/Ahd/12, 2342/Ahd/15, 2343/Ahd/2015,

ITA 1766/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri T.P. Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

…IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “D” BENCH (Virtual Court) Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Vice President And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member Sl. ITA No. Appellant Respondent A.Y. No. 1 1766/Ahd/2012 Dy. CIT, AIA 2008-09 Circle-1, Ah’d Engineering Ltd. Ah’d 2 2342/Ahd/2015 Dy. CIT, AIA 2009-10 Circle-1(1)(1), Engineering Ah’d Ltd. Ah’d 3 2343/Ahd/2015 Dy. CIT, AIA 2010-11 Circle-1(1)(1), Engineering Ah’d Ltd. Ah’d 4 1112/Ahd/2017 Dy. CIT, AIA 2011-12 Circle-1(1)(1), Engineering Ah’d Ltd. Ah’d 5 1835/Ahd/2017 Dy. CIT, AIA 2012-13 Circle-1(1)(1), Engineering Ah’d Ltd. Ah’d 6 2805/Ahd/2017 Dy. CIT,…

Aia Engineering Ltd., Ahmedabad vs. The Dy.CIT., Circle-1, Ahmedabad

In the result, ITA Appeals 1766/Ahd/12, 2342/Ahd/15, 2343/Ahd/2015,

ITA 1757/AHD/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad04 Jan 2021AY 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri T.P. Hemani, Sr. A.R. &For Respondent: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr. D.R

Section 143(2)Section 143(3)

ITO, New Delhi vs. M/S. Richmond Park Property Management Service Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 3655/DEL/2017[2012-13]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi11 Nov 2020AY 2012-13

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar(Through Video Conferencing) Ita No. 3655/Del/2017 : Asstt. Year : 2012-13 Ito Vs M/S. Richmond Park Property Ward-21(3), Management Service Pvt. Ltd., 9Th Floor Dlf Centre, Sansad Marg, New Delhi New Delhi (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaccr0095H Assessee By : Sh. Satyajeet Goel, Ca Revenue By : Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing: 05.11.2020 Date Of Pronouncement: 11.11.2020

For Appellant: Sh. Satyajeet Goel, CAFor Respondent: Sh. Ramesh Kumar, Sr. DR

Section 14A

…e revenue has filed appeal before the Tribunal owing to CBDT Circular No.5/2014 dated 11.02.2014. 5. The Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT Vs. Holcim India Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.468/2014 dated 05.09.2014, Maxopp Investment Ltd. Vs. CIT (2012) 347 ITR 272 (Del) and Cheminvest Ltd. Vs. CIT (2009) 317 ITR 86 (Del) has categorically held that earning of exempt income is a pre- requisite for disallowance u/s 14A. 6. Respectfully following the ratio of the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court, we hereby hold that no disallowance u/s 14A is called for in the instant case. 7. In the result, the appeal of…

ACIT, Circle- 11(2), New Delhi vs. Him Urja Pvt. Ltd., New Delhi

In the result, appeal of the Department dismissed

ITA 7843/DEL/2017[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi03 Nov 2020AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

For Appellant: Shri Gautam Jain, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Bhagwati Charan, Sr. DR

Section 14A

…s received or receivable during the relevant previous year. [Para 23]." In the said judgment the Hon'ble Delhi High Court followed the case of CIT vs. Holcim India P. Ltd. 57 Taxmann.com 28 (2015) Delhi and distinguished the decision of Maxopp Investment Ltd. 347 ITR 272. Appellant has also relied upon various judgments in his favour on the same lines. Since, there is no claim of exempt income by the appellant during the year, the ratio laid down by Hon'ble Delhi High Court is squarely applicable in the case of appellant and accordingly no additions are called for. Hence, Ground nos. 1 to 4 are allowed.” 4. Afte…

Je Energy Ventures P.Ltd, Noida vs. DCIT, Circle-1, Noida

ITA 6598/DEL/2018[2014-15]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi30 Sept 2020AY 2014-15

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

For Appellant: Shri Anubhav Rastogi, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sukesh Kumar Jain, CIT DR

Section 143Section 144CSection 14ASection 92BSection 92D

…Enpro P. Ltd. vs. ACIT (CO No.194/Del/2017). 21. We are of the considered view that the AO cannot make disallowance u/s 14A of the Act mechanically and in view of the law laid down by Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Maxopp Investments Ltd. vs. CIT (2012) 347 ITR 272 (Delhi), disallowance cannot exceed the exempt dividend income. Identical issue has been decided in favour of the taxpayer in its own case for AY 2013-14 (supra) by returning following findings :- “33. Undisputedly, the taxpayer has suo motu disallowed the amount of Rs.21 crores u/s 14A read with Rule 8D which is more than the dividend income…

Triveni Engineering & Industries Ltd., Noida vs. ACIT, New Delhi

ITA 1959/DEL/2016[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Aug 2020AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri R. K. Panda & Ms Suchitra Kamble

Section 115JSection 143(1)Section 143(2)Section 14A

…1 ITA Nos. 1955 to 1959/Del/2016 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH: ‘A’ NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS SUCHITRA KAMBLE, JUDICIAL MEMBER (THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING) Triveni Engineering & Industries Vs Addl. CIT(A) Ltd. Range-16 8th Floor Express Trade Tower, New Delhi 15-16, Sector-16A Noida AABCT6370L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA No. 1956 to 1959/DEL/2016 ( A.Y 2002-03 to 2005-06) Triveni Engineering & Industries Vs ACIT Ltd. Circle-16(1) 8th Floor Express Trade Tower, New Delhi 15-16, Sector-16A Noida AABCT6370L (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant by Sh. Rohit…